Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    No, wealth is a blessing. What is immoral is:
    Boasting about it
    Taking pictures of it
    Not being grateful
    Not sharing your wealth
    Not helping the needy
    Using it for immoral reasons


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fullofsurprises)
    Not from Microsoft though, they both stole from Xerox but Gates didn't have anything Jobs wanted.
    Bill Gates showed off a prototype of a personal tablet, the first of it's kind as far as I'm aware, in 2001. Then there was the whole iPad thing.

    Steve Jobs was a terrific business man, but as an entrepeneur, it can't be denied he ripped other people off a lot.
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Goody2Shoes-x)
    Bill Gates showed off a prototype of a personal tablet, the first of it's kind as far as I'm aware, in 2001. Then there was the whole iPad thing.

    Steve Jobs was a terrific business man, but as an entrepeneur, it can't be denied he ripped other people off a lot.
    Oh, OK, I was talking about their early days when there was a moral issue as they were basically operating as individuals or in small businesses. You are talking about the activities of giant corporations - harder to pin on the individuals. The Microsoft Tablet PC you refer to came out in 2002, but there were a number of attempts at it before then, including by British company Acorn, way back in 1997!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Those who do become mega rich will pay more taxes (in theory at least) and that'll benefit society. So, no it is not immoral.

    What is immoral are those wealthy people who have enough money, yet decide to become tax dodgers.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Nobody should be able to tell you what to do with your money if you have got it through legal means.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    i think it depends entirely on how you use the money!!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I don't get people that say it is immoral, many of the richest people in the world today earned their money legitimately, look at Bill Gates, Carlos Slim, Warren Buffet. Of course these are guys that do a lot for charity. It doesn't matter if they inherited it or not, nobody has a right to say where their money goes. I would gladly give most of my money to my family (not just my kids) to ensure they have a live life on a higher platform so they can end up ending up even higher when I am gone.

    You can't force people to give away 'THEIR' money, you have no right to tell them what to do with it, you had no hand in earning them that money. If you did purchase their products then who forced you to? The rich are already being FORCED to pay ridiculous amounts in taxes anyway, all to fund things they don't use. What you people are talking about is just 'GIVING AWAY' money, that's just wrong.

    It is a fact that some people are 'better', more imaginative than others and thus end up making a lot of money, there are people who are poor because they can't get up their lazy backsides and attempt to change their lives, why should I help them? I would gladly help those who I believe could make a difference to the world, not those who would just exist and waste their lives away.

    Having resources in the hand of someone who knows what to do with it is better than spreading it to people who are so excited with money they just waste it all away. If I was a billionaire I would:

    1. Invest millions in Education (Better Resources, Bonuses for Teachers, Scholarships for the brightest)
    2. Invest millions in Technology (Space Travel/Weather Engineering/Terraforming)
    3. Invest Millions in Healthcare
    4. Help ensure developing countries have access to water/electricity/education/healthcare


    Those are the things I would spend my money on, The Government needs to do their best to get rid of corruption because without it Poverty wouldn't be as bad as it is right now. By spending money on the things mentioned I would be helping mankind make years and years of progress in less time because we could simply not rely on the Government to invest in things like that because people think it is a waste of their 'Taxpayer' money and revolt.

    It is also a fact that poor people are reproducing at an alarmingly higher rate than the rich, although they have every right to it is SO UNETHICAL! It should be the other way round, here we have people working towards having a good career and money so they can give their child a good life whilst some pop out babies with no way to care for it expecting others to care for them, that is so wrong. I wonder who they will blame when overpopulation becomes a problem.

    Basically if we always care for the poor the rate of progress we make as the human race would slow down exponentially. For their to never be poor people there would need to be a constant supply of jobs - How is this possible when the poorest think it is okay to have so many children!? Once the population becomes more controlled we could then see Poverty decreasing. That's why I don't get why people are so against birth control.

    Take classes for examples, do people notice how the smaller classes perform so well?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RachaelBee)
    Nobody should be able to tell you what to do with your money if you have got it through legal means.
    I'm not suggesting we should force anyone to do anything.

    This conversation isn't about forced redistribution of income. I would never support that, other than taxation.

    It is purely about morals.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Chocolate lemon stands for everything that's wrong with society.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    People with lots of money can fund political parties, buy newspapers and whatnot. If say the nicer half of the super rich decided to give away their cash they'd lose power ceding it to the evil half?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Nope, it is not immoral. It seems that some people are thinking of wealth like a pie, and that someone having a large chunk of it means other people can't. That is definatly not how wealth works. These people amass there wealth through the market mechanisms in place, so there extreme wealth is a completely natural outcome of the free market. If they didn't have this wealth, would other people be better off? No, they wouldn't - infact these people contribute a lot more to society in terms of taxes and the creation of wealth for others (employment etc.) than a normal individual would.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 321zero)
    I'm not suggesting we should force anyone to do anything.

    This conversation isn't about forced redistribution of income. I would never support that, other than taxation.

    It is purely about morals.
    Ok, morally I see nothing wrong with people being rich if they have got it through fair and legal means.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I wouldn't call it immoral per-se. It's when someone (or a family) hoards tens/hundreds of millions and spends a relatively tiny amount of it, do I find it slightly mean (but not immoral).
    If you spend a reasonable proportion of your accumulated "vast wealth" across your lifetime then it ends up filtering back down anyway.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    If earned through illegal activities, yes.

    Otherwise, it's like asking if smartness is immoral.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Not if you work really hard for it
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Indeterminate)
    If earned through illegal activities, yes.

    Otherwise, it's like asking if smartness is immoral.
    What if your activities were legal, yet rightfully should be illegal?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Socktor)
    What if your activities were legal, yet rightfully should be illegal?
    Example?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by The Socktor)
    What if your activities were legal, yet rightfully should be illegal?
    For example?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wiska)
    Example?
    (Original post by Indeterminate)
    For example?
    Use of child labour, pollution without compensation or mitagation, jepodising the safety of those around you, sweatshops, etc. (yes, I know these are all illegal in the UK, however, it doesn't stop them doing it in other countries).

    Also, historically, slave trading.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Socktor)
    Use of child labour, pollution without compensation or mitagation, jepodising the safety of those around you, sweatshops, etc. (yes, I know these are all illegal in the UK, however, it doesn't stop them doing it in other countries).

    Also, historically, slave trading.
    Those are both immoral and illegal, companies found doing those usually find themselves in big trouble. Slave trading too is illegal now, nobody becomes rich through it...
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.