Why do leftists hate the rich and successful?

Kate Peterson2 said:Yeah, sure, but you have to look at how much of that wealth actually came from honest work versus just straight-up theft, war profiteering, and general shady dealings. You really can't compare the billionaires over in the States to what we see here. Over there, they spent two or three generations building up that kind of legacy, whereas around here, people are pulling it off in ten years or less.

Gregory Peterson2 said:I’ve got absolutely nothing against the wealthy. In fact, I’m all for it if they’re more capable, more driven, smarter, or better educated... and consequently end up with more cash than everyone else.

The real issue pops up when people who don't fit that description—simply because the deck was stacked against them from birth—end up with way, way more money than someone who is objectively much more talented but just didn't get the same head start in life.

If we all started at the exact same finish line, I wouldn't have a single complaint about wild capitalism or the "survival of the fittest" mentality. But let's be real: that's impossible. Since we don't all have the same opportunities, I believe the total wealth should be distributed as fairly as possible. We need a system that still rewards hard work, discourages laziness, and tries to give everyone a fighting chance to make it big. Now, don't get me wrong—I know a kid working on a ranch in Wyoming will never have the same path to success as Prince William. But the government should at least ensure that through fair wealth distribution, even that kid has a shot at climbing the ladder if they’ve got the grit and the drive to earn it.

Hannah Jackson7 said:Let’s be honest—for most of these so-called "average Joes," what we’re actually seeing is pure, unadulterated envy.
These people don't even have the decency to identify as leftists—they don't hold any real ideological convictions whatsoever—they just harbor a deep-seated resentment toward anyone more successful than themselves. They genuinely believe it is perfectly acceptable for the government to plunder the productive members of society just to hand out handouts to them.

Ronald Martinez4 said:Larry Summers headed off on vacation on some little boat; apparently, it takes 24 hours just to fill the tank, and that’ll run you about $170 $0.00.
Who are these people claiming leftists don't care about money? Who in their right mind doesn't love cash?

David Vaughn75;46385463 said:An entrepreneur isn't some genius who's 1,000 times smarter or more capable than their employees.

But they certainly deserve 1,000 times more credit when it comes to the income those workers actually bring home.

Benjamin Taylor6 said:Personally, I don't identify as left or right. I’m for HONESTY!! And let me tell you, in our American brand of capitalism, honesty is the rarest commodity there is. Then everyone acts surprised when Americans vote to dismantle social safety nets, only to end up hating capitalism later. It turns out most American capitalists built their empires through shady, bottom-of-the-barrel tactics.

Historically speaking, the first communist was Lao CE. And after him, Jesus Christ. You can see that psychological pattern perfectly played out in this story:

Because of all this, I actually put together this little narrative:

There’s a tale involving Lao Cea and the Chinese Emperor regarding the nature of sin. I’ll recount it in my own way, imagining it takes place in Ancient Rome during the time of Christ:
Back in those days, the Roman Emperor heard word of Jesus of Nazareth. People were telling him about this incredibly honest, selfless man. So, the Emperor decided to appoint this sage as the Chief Justice in Rome. Now, Christ didn't exactly jump at the job—he only agreed because the Emperor was being incredibly persistent. The Emperor even threw the threat of imprisonment at him. In the end, the Emperor made a deal: if he accepted, the state would give a tenth of its taxes to the poor, and Christ would be granted two hours every single day to preach his teachings at the Roman Colosseum. So, Christ became the Chief Justice in Rome, and on his very first day, he had to preside over the case of a common thief. The man had been caught stealing from a shop that dealt in Chinese silk. Jesus sentenced him to three years of forced labor as a galley rower. But that wasn't all. He also sentenced the shop owner to the exact same six-month sentence. The courtroom was absolutely stunned. The next day, the Emperor called Christ in for a private meeting:
"My wise teacher from Israel, why on earth did you sentence the shop owner to forced labor as well? We get that the thief deserved three years in the galleys, but I don't see what the silk merchant did to merit such a punishment."
Jesus replied simply: "Your Majesty, I interrogated both men to uncover the absolute truth. The thief was merely a simple criminal, so I gave him three years of rowing. But I punished the merchant for entirely different reasons. To me, he is also a thief, just a more sophisticated one. He owns multiple shops across Rome selling Chinese silk. He sources it in China and moves it via caravan to Europe. He buys it dirt cheap and sells it at astronomical prices. After fifteen years of trading, he has managed to amass enough wealth to own seven shops, a villa, and a massive estate in the countryside. He has fifty slaves working for him and over 150 servants and maids. There is no honest way to accumulate that much wealth in such a short span of time."
....
......

p.s.

I have a particular soft spot for these COMMUNIST CAPITALISTS. For example:
😲 😁

placidrider48 said:I mean, I guess you could argue that most of these ultra-wealthy folks didn't actually earn their fortunes fairly, and they certainly aren't using that cash for anything particularly noble, so maybe seizing those assets could work as both a legal penalty and a way to actually help people who are struggling through no fault of their own.

James Nguyen13 said:

David Vaughn75 said:

Peter Reyes63 said:Quincy:

The thread should be titled: "Why do conservatives roll over for the rich and exploiters?" Why do you think there isn't a thread with a title like that?

That would be a pretty short discussion. I'm guessing to you, every employer is an exploiter (which is how most union guys see it).

So what does rolling over for the rich actually mean to you? Are you saying people should just have their stuff taken away simply because they have it? Go back and read my first post, then tell me if you want that based on reason 1, 2, or 3.

I'll give you the answer to your unstarted thread right now:

If the employees and the boss enter a working relationship voluntarily and agree to the terms, it’s a fair deal. If Ivica Todorić hires his aunt to work a cash register for minimum wage, that’s fine. There’s no coercion involved. If she had better skills and could do something else, she would. If someone offers me a burger for $8.25, and I agree to pay my money for it, that’s fine too. Even if the guy could have charged me $6.75 and still made a profit, I weighed the situation and decided paying $8.25 for that burger was worth it.

Capitalism and the free market are built on freedom and voluntary exchange. Leftist ideologies are built on force. The government tells you what you must do here and there. As far as I'm concerned, anything goes as long as nobody is forcing anyone. Wages depend on market conditions. Do I really need to explain why a cashier makes peanuts while a mechanical engineer or a specialist surgeon makes bank?

Prostitution is fine by me.
Rape is NOT.
Hiring your aunt at the register $1000 is fine.
Owning slaves to work your fields is NOT.
Get it?

Milton Friedman hit the nail on the head when he said there’s a direct link between economic freedom and personal freedom. Where you find socialism, you find a dictator.

Quincy:

Starting a thread like that is an easy way to label someone a psychopath. Taking pleasure in something others find "outrageous," just so you can feel morally superior about it? That's a disaster.

I don't get what you're trying to say. 🤷

James Nguyen13 said:Look, man, that sentence doesn't actually mean anything. A worker is just selling their labor on the market, and an entrepreneur is the one buying it. It’s a two-way street—it's a mutual exchange where neither side can function without the other.

Charles Campbell7 said:Leftists are nothing more than dreamers living in a fantasy land. I suppose it’s perfectly fine to hold those views when you're young and haven't yet grasped how the world actually operates. But when you have an adult—someone who identifies as an intellectual, mind you, in their 40s or 50s—still playing the leftist role... well, that suggests something else entirely is going on. From my observations, there are really just two types of leftists:

The "Sincere" Leftist (an adult who claims to be well-informed) is essentially a narcissistic sociopath who uses leftist ideology as a substitute for reality. They truly behave like narcissists; the moment you attempt to dismantle their ideology with actual logic, they lose their sense of self and react as if they've been personally assaulted.

Then you have the Manipulators. This group doesn't give a damn about ideology at all; they've simply realized they can rake in a paycheck by rambling incessantly about leftist utopias.

It is my firm contention that a sincere, mentally stable adult simply cannot be a leftist. ☕. That said, I am more than willing to hear an example—a specific individual—who might prove me wrong.

Charles Campbell7 said:Leftists are nothing more than dreamers living in a fantasy land. I suppose it’s perfectly fine to hold those views when you're young and haven't yet grasped how the world actually operates. But when you have an adult—someone who identifies as an intellectual, mind you, in their 40s or 50s—still playing the leftist role... well, that suggests something else entirely is going on. From my observations, there are really just two types of leftists:

The "Sincere" Leftist (an adult who claims to be well-informed) is essentially a narcissistic sociopath who uses leftist ideology as a substitute for reality. They truly behave like narcissists; the moment you attempt to dismantle their ideology with actual logic, they lose their sense of self and react as if they've been personally assaulted.

Then you have the Manipulators. This group doesn't give a damn about ideology at all; they've simply realized they can rake in a paycheck by rambling incessantly about leftist utopias.

It is my firm contention that a sincere, mentally stable adult simply cannot be a leftist. ☕. That said, I am more than willing to hear an example—a specific individual—who might prove me wrong.

David Vaughn75 said:Look, if you take a thousand people who are all genetically identical—just a massive group of clones—and they decide to start a business, someone’s gotta be stuck on the assembly line while someone else sits in the corner office running the show. Inequality isn't just a bug in the system; it's baked right into the recipe.

I mean, look, kapitalizam is an unfair mess, but honestly? We haven't come up with anything better yet.

George Booth58 said:I think this premise is flawed. I mean, what kind of company is actually set up where 1,000 people gather and then just roll dice to decide who gets which job or where the hierarchy sits?

Intelligence isn't necessarily the same thing as ability. It more or less measures potential—how someone handles new situations, maybe. There was once a waitress in the USA who recorded the highest IQ ever measured.

The market tends to reward those who know how to actually produce something. Anyone could work a line, but only a handful out of thousands will have the idea of what to make and how to sell it. To me, the idea is really the most vital part of industry.

Grace Edwards said:Hmm.. Interesting.
So, what you're saying is all adult leftists are mentally unstable in one way or another.
And I suppose—all right-wingers are just perfect reflections of God's image? ☕

David Vaughn75 said:But here’s the kicker—those big-shot entrepreneurs and managers aren't usually the ones coming up with the genius stuff. It's the engineers. And yet, those same engineers end up fighting for nothing but crumbs while everyone else takes the lion's share.