EPA to reject Obama fuel efficiency standards early next week

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

Gobberment of "..the (wealthy) people.." by & for "..the (wealthy) people..."

When was the first/last time we had ANY "poor/poverty" congressional representatives-- EVER?

I agree with your overall argument that our system of picking representatives is flawed and results in poor outcomes. However, it would be unlikely to find a brilliant and responsible mind in a person who is living in poverty. Impoverished people rarely prefer to be in poverty, and responsible, sound-minded, and intelligent people don't find themselves in poverty very often.

Heck, Stephen Hawking could literally do nothing for himself, and yet still managed to not only avoid poverty, but enjoy an upper class lifestyle.

The arbitrary categories we group people in are not important when considering the fitness of a political representative. What is most important is that they leverage reason to the full extent possible to serve the interests of those they represent.

There should be no such thing as career politician. We should have not only term limits, but also limits to the cumulative amount of time serving in any political position. Representatives should come from the community, and they should return to the community, thereby reducing the temptation to appeal to special interests to maintain political office. Being a politician should actually be a sacrifice to serve the people, not an opportunity to be richly rewarded in politics.

[gone-ot]

SUMMARY: RICH begets the RICHER.

Feel free to substitute "affluent" if necessary.

[redpoint5]

Of course! That's the way the universe operates; at least this one. There is no fairness in nature.

[oil pan 4]

Being fair, doing the right thing, let alone following the rules is not how the majority of the rich got that way.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by oil pan 4

Being fair, doing the right thing, let alone following the rules is not how the majority of the rich got that way.

Maybe so. I often struggle with the thought that the extent to which a business I might own could be successful, likely depends on the extent to which I'm willing to be a slimy salesman. I worked for a boss who promised many things, delivered on very few, billed his customer more than double our salaries, and told us repeatedly he's making no money on our contract.

It's unclear to me what portion of the 1% top earners are unethical, but I do believe it's possible to be wealthy and successful while adhering to both the law and ethics. I'm currently working for a company that appears to be both very profitable and ethical, though it is in the medical industry, which itself is a mess.

In the end, I assume people are human, with varying degrees of ethics, distributed across all ends of the wealth spectrum. There are unscrupulous people swindling others of their money to feed their drug addiction just as there are unscrupulous people swindling others to feed their wealth addiction.

[gone-ot]

How does that (in)famous John Wayne quote go? "Life Ain't Fair...Pilgram"

[Xist]

Perhaps a poor person with a billion-dollar idea might be less inclined to keep the newfound riches to him or herself.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by Xist

Perhaps a poor person with a billion-dollar idea might be less inclined to keep the newfound riches to him or herself.

Probably so, which is likely part of the reason they are poor in the first place. My cousin is extremely generous, and back when he was awarded a $60k settlement would always offer to buy me lunch. I'd never take him up on the offer because I didn't want to have any part in his wealth squandering. He was broke inside of 3 months.

Same cousin's father passed away and he inherited $100k. 5 months later he's penniless again. People who make poor investments, such as gambling, usually never develop the habits necessary to make wise investments, and this is evidenced by the abysmal outcomes for lottery winners. People who are inclined to "invest" in the lottery are unlikely to spend their winnings wisely.

2 economists that studied the spending habits of the poor and observed these generalities:

So why are the poor, the world over, making these seemingly bad decisions?

The answer, according to economists who have studied this question (Banerjee & Dufflo, Poor Economics, 2011), is that things that taste good, or things that make life less boring are a priority for the poor...

In America, a poor man in in his early 20’s, with numerous debts to other people, spent his paycheck on personal pleasures. He purchased new tattoos, new clothes, a weekend vacation, and some upgraded accessories for his car, instead of making payments to his creditors.

“The poor are skeptical about their supposed opportunities, and the possibility of any radical change in their lives…Therefore, they focus on the here and now, on living their lives as pleasantly as possible, and on celebrating when the occasion demands it.”

Not all giving is beneficial. If it enables bad habits, it works against the wellbeing of the person with bad habits. They key to success isn't just opportunity, but also the character to delay immediate pleasure to better prepare for the future.

This isn't to say that there aren't poor people who only lack opportunity, only that the perpetually poor often maintain poor life habits. Making character and habit changes is among the most difficult challenges a person faces. It's literally re-wiring the neural circuitry in the mind, which requires making a deliberate effort to deny established paths of thinking, and creating new paths of thinking.

[gone-ot]

Gooberment = Institutionalized greed?

[oil pan 4]

I still have all the money I inherited from my dad's estate and doubled it.
My sister took her half and was broke 8 months later.
Poor people are poor for a reason.