Individual wealth redistribution

108 posts / 0 new
Last post
revol68's picture
revol68
Offline
Joined: 23-02-04
Jun 20 2007 02:22
j.rogue wrote:
He is wary of giving money to specific projects because he doesn't believe he has the right to decide what "deserves" the money. He can afford to give away $400,000 because that is the trust fund his parents gave him. He isn't even spending it right now, he is living off the money he makes at his service industry job. He is looking more and more at activist-led foundations as the least problematic way of redistributing wealth, but I encourage him to find a better model that isn't all "non-profit indstrial complex"-y and whatnot. And he is not a prick.

if he gives that money away instead of buying a house then he's a silly prick.

and there is no way of circumventing the 'right to decide where the money goes' so he might as well spend it on himself and give a small bit to various projects he feels are worthwhile.

that or he could go walking around a rough area of town telling people he has 400,000 on him.

Uncontrollable
Online
Joined: 13-12-06
Jun 20 2007 02:23

What has he said about WSA or NEFAC?

888's picture
888
Offline
Joined: 30-09-03
Jun 20 2007 04:08
j.rogue wrote:
Wow, with an attitude like that, you would think it was 1930. You're right, its all capitalist fat cats and factory workers out there.

How isn't it? How can you not hate rich people?

j.rogue
Offline
Joined: 8-04-07
Jun 20 2007 04:13
Uncontrollable wrote:
What has he said about WSA or NEFAC?

I have yet to have a real conversation with him about either.

888 wrote:
j.rogue wrote:
Wow, with an attitude like that, you would think it was 1930. You're right, its all capitalist fat cats and factory workers out there.

How isn't it? How can you not hate rich people?

Believe me when I say I have as much a reason to hate rich people as anyone. And most days I do. But there are individuals out there whom I don't hate.

Nate's picture
Nate
Offline
Joined: 16-12-05
Jun 20 2007 04:42

Rogue, I don't understand your friend's worry. Is it that if he chooses who to give the money to then he's perpetuating something he doesn't like, like rich people have the power to decide how to spend their money? If that's the case it's just not something he can get around. If he's going to give the money away he has to pick who it goes to. Unless he picks at random or like leaves a bag of cash somewhere in public. Even then, though, he's still making an implicit decision about who doesn't get the money (like that old slogan something along the lines that choosing to do nothing is still a choice). If he gives the money to a foundation that doesn't get around this - the foundation will give to someone according to their funding priorities, which are pretty knowable and predictable (that's not a dis, just that foundations are a type of organization and organizations generally do things that make some sort of sense).

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Jun 20 2007 04:43

He can buy me a burger king franchize and I'll hire Nate as the manager.

MJ's picture
MJ
Offline
Joined: 5-01-06
Jun 20 2007 04:47
Nate wrote:
If he's going to give the money away he has to pick who it goes to. Unless he picks at random or like leaves a bag of cash somewhere in public. Even then, though, he's still making an implicit decision about who doesn't get the money (like that old slogan something along the lines that choosing to do nothing is still a choice).

This is why I am DEMANDING $100,000 for the NEA. This isn't a joke, it's a win-win situation. If he doesn't think it's a good idea then it's all the more reason to cave in to my demand.

j.rogue
Offline
Joined: 8-04-07
Jun 20 2007 04:48

But is there any foundations out there that are sopt-on and righteous? Are there ways to get around the 501c3 requirement? I hear you Nate, I don't think it is avoidable, but I thought I would ask to see if folks have insightful comments, such as the above Burger King suggestion. wink

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Jun 20 2007 04:49

He can pay me 100 gs to "deal" with the chuck hendricks problem.

MJ's picture
MJ
Offline
Joined: 5-01-06
Jun 20 2007 04:51
j.rogue wrote:
But is there any foundations out there that are spot-on and righteous?

To develop a deep even tan you've gotta start with a foundation that's spot-on and righteous.

j.rogue
Offline
Joined: 8-04-07
Jun 20 2007 05:00

Thank you, now I must poor bleach on my eyeballs.
Thuggie, are you negotiable on price? Or is it specific to the individual?

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Jun 20 2007 05:03

I'll take hendricks to the pine barrens for the price of gas and a carton of smokes.

Nate's picture
Nate
Offline
Joined: 16-12-05
Jun 20 2007 06:04

Duke, I wouldn't take a job with the power to hire and fire, and I'm much cheaper than a BK manager. I'd settle for 2 grand to live off and be a fulltime outside organizer for the rest of this summer instead of having to jobhunt and work.

And there is no Chuck Hendricks problem. Chuck Hendricks is an urban myth made up by anarcho-syndicalist parents to scare their wobbly kids.

MJ, please take down that picture of me. You're putting me at a great risk now.

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Jun 20 2007 08:31
Quote:
People were misunderstanding his position

This is not a problem. In fact it should be encouraged.

voline's picture
voline
Offline
Joined: 17-06-07
Jun 20 2007 11:59

Rogue,
why don't you borrow another six hundred thousand and join the professionals?
K Foundation
The spark might catch the powder second time round.

j.rogue
Offline
Joined: 8-04-07
Jun 20 2007 13:19
voline wrote:
Rogue,
why don't you borrow another six hundred thousand and join the professionals?
K Foundation
The spark might catch the powder second time round.

Please show me where I can borrow 600,000. For that kind of cash, I would fake my own death.
Also, please tell me those folks got slapped! Burning the money. Good lord.

Lazy Riser's picture
Lazy Riser
Offline
Joined: 6-05-05
Jun 20 2007 13:55

I'm given to understand Mr Drummond was merely doing the BoE's job for it. The notes in question were bound for the incinerator anyway. Gullibility, another trait of “wealthy radicals”.