>>>Their record on humam rights.
>
>You're saying it's OK for you to oppress because others are bad too?

No.


>>>Why do you choose the 1%?
>
>Because if the 1% keeps it up, they will cause a revolution. No value judgments or accusations apart from that.
>
>>>Are we operating on the assumption that my $3000 has an equal impact as someone else's $60K, but someone else's $60K has less of an impact than yet another's $6M?
>
>Not sure where that straw man came from. I'm saying that you can survive on $3K/year because others are exploited to keep your costs down. No value judgments or accusations apart from that.
>
>>>Or I could just do what I do, make good decisions on where my food comes from, and occasionally point out the baseless assumption that if the 0.5% just let us have more money, we would spend it making the world a better place rather than perpetuate the status quo.
>
>The baseless assumption is your own straw man. My concern is that the 1% cannot keep scooping value for themselves without consequence. I also consider that today's crazies are far meaner than they used to be and revolution is what they dream of. Ask Dragan what to expect even from the benign dentist next door when social order collapses, and consider what the definite crazies will be capable of. And yes I do blame the 1%: with special privilege comes special responsibility, no matter how the special privilege came about.


Thats fine.

Don't you think that applies to the 2% and the 5% and at the very least the 50%.

The 99% of America are largely still in the 1% of the world and they don't seem to set as high a standard for altruism than they standard theyve set for people richer than them.


>As I've said before, some people in this forum are in the 1%, even into the 0.5%, so you may be grasping the wrong end of the wrong stick when you insist on attributing such sentiment to greed or envy.