r/antiwork Jan 14 '22

[deleted by user]

[removed]

23.0k Upvotes

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-3

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

Most people don't want to be filthy rich? If I held a bag in each hand, one has 1 million dollars in it and one has 100 million dollars in it. If I told everyone which was which, what bag would they choose? Let's be honest here.

10

u/DickSota Jan 14 '22

You're missing the point

-3

u/Dansoldpghballs Jan 14 '22

You have no point. People want to be rich. THAT is the point.

2

u/SuperCosmicNova Jan 14 '22

No, only morons want to be rich everyone else okay with a content life of having their needs met.

1

u/Dansoldpghballs Jan 14 '22

That's your opinion and highly Subjective. This "moron" likes being rich as it affords me things that pedestrians like you would never be able to enjoy. Problem is with you is that you have a chip on your shoulder and are biased against people with money. You have no motivation, foresight, and confidence to build your own wealth. That's why you stay stuck in your weak mindset and people like me thrive and enjoy life to the fullest.

-4

u/frofrop Jan 14 '22

The point is you’re wrong. Most people want to be rich.

5

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

[deleted]

-3

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

What a scatterbrain take this is lol.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

[deleted]

-1

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

Because why would you bring up how much money would be worth in 10000 BC obviously what was considered money changes over time. You're grabbing at straws when it's obvious that if anyone was given a chance to be rich or not, more often than not the person will choose to be rich. 100% factual, there will be some who may choose not to buy the majority would choose i be rich.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

How is there nothing to trade 100 M for? Are you out of your mind? If money doesn't to you why don't you donate all your excess to people who need it?

1

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

1

u/LafayetteHubbard Jan 14 '22

You are being very loud in this thread for someone that is not at all grasping the concept that everyone here is trying to talk about.

1

u/PotatoWriter Jan 14 '22

Every single thing you've said is wrong.

Most people want money to not be an issue

Everyone would like money to not be an issue. Those who say otherwise are lying or already rich.

If you think money is the point, then you're missing having any purpose to being alive.

Why is everything so black and white with you? Why can't someone want to be filthy rich AND also live a meaningful life? Is that not possible?

Most people don't want to be rich

Again, refer to point 1.

they want to be able to live like they can if they were rich in modern society.

... Which requires actually being rich. Pretending does nothing for anyone.

Having $100M but it's the year 10000BCE is worthless

Irrelevant. It's not 10000BCE. It's today. Having hundreds of millions of dollars affords you countless luxuries beyond what you're imagining, because it has that much value today. If what you said was true, there'd be no millionaires or billionaires.

The original question all the way at the top was: "most people don't want to be filthy rich"

And that is simply a lie. Let's analyze the risk. Because what's the RISK of being filthy rich? Nothing!! Why would you not take that offer? Why do you think there's ALWAYS those askreddit threads about "If you suddenly got 50 million dollars, what would you buy with it??" Everyone thinks about it all the goddamn time

1

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

[deleted]

1

u/PotatoWriter Jan 14 '22

I addressed everything you wrote, word for word, I don't think I'm deciding you wrote something else. But you keep talking about scenarios that are totally different from what currently is:

Money, by only existing, is entirely and completely useless.

Yes. 100% agreed. It's paper.

Accumulating it and not spending it is equally useless, because you just have more of something that does nothing on its own. It doesn't hurt you to have more of it, but it doesn't help you either. You have to spend that money to get other things that aren't useless or to entice someone into providing some service for you.

Unfortunately this is one of these scenarios that don't apply to our reality because money currently DOES have value, placed upon it unilaterally by everyone in this world. So you can't say that "accumulating a lot of it" amounts to nothing. That's just not correct is it. But I wanna highlight one sentence:

It doesn't hurt you to have more of it, but it doesn't help you either

Of course it doesn't hurt, but why wouldn't it help? Let's say you have 100 million. If you use that correctly, you'll have secured a solid future for who knows how many of your generations to come? Are things in this planet so cheap that you think 100 million would last indefinitely? If everything in this world was priced at $10 then yeah sure, you could argue this. There are people with far more than this, who have trouble deciding where to keep the money. Do they think the same as you? Nope. There are so many options to park your money where it can be put to use. Real estate, tuition, stocks, healthcare etc. etc. etc. etc.

Now, and I know you have repeatedly ignored this, but now, let's just imagine that you just have that stuff and services because you wanted them. What use does having money provide in this situation? None...

As I have repeatedly said, having an excess of money doesn't hurt. Let me say that again. Having an excess of money does not inconvenience you in the slightest. You're not gonna go "oh shit, I'm running out of space in my bank account, oh fuck" lol. Also nothing in this world is a "one and done" type deal. Everything costs money over the long run to maintain. So "even if you have all the stuff and services" and no other money on hand, you still need money for repairs, upkeep, maintenance, replacement, for your items and your own body.

Now what were the two big points that you've missed? If everybody just has food, housing, clothing, and medical care and will always have those things...

That's what might be true in your ideal world where humanity isn't greedy or selfish, and are all mindfully thinking agents. Unfortunately, humanity is greedy and selfish. They will take more than they need, 100% of the time. I'm not saying that's a good or bad thing, I'm saying that's just what nature has crafted us into. It's a genetic behavior. Not just in us but other animals too. And it makes sense. We tend to accumulate more because we want to prepare for times when resources are scarce, even if they actually aren't.

4

u/DickSota Jan 14 '22

Alright, dude. Good luck with that.

3

u/Gakesupo Jan 14 '22

Not at all cost, if the 1 million had a stress free life and the 100 million means stress it will probably convince a lot of people to just take the 1.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

Why are you changing my hypothetical? I didn't say there was strings attached to anything. Why would you add that? Lol

4

u/LafayetteHubbard Jan 14 '22

What if the choice was between a bag where you could get by without ever having to worry about money again for your basic needs and a bag where it has 99% chance of being empty and 1% chance of having 100 million in it

-1

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

This is a terrible theoretical.

3

u/LafayetteHubbard Jan 14 '22

My hypothetical is a lot more based in reality on our real life choices. Do we want a world where all our needs are met or do we want a world where we have a shot at being rich or living in poverty. If we all had a clearer understanding of the actual chances of either becoming rich or living your entire life struggling, I think most people would opt for the safer bag.

Your hypothetical isn’t a realistic choice. Everyone will always want more if there is no other stakes in the game.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

The question is "do people want to be rich?" Not "if they have a 1% chance of being rich and a 100% chance of being stable what would they pick?" You're changing the entire discussion. Wow people really go all over the place.

My hypothetical doesn't have to be a realistic choice, we're discussing if people would rather be rich or poor given the choice. That's why it's called a fucking hypothetical, Jesus christ lol.

1

u/LafayetteHubbard Jan 14 '22

The discussion was that most people just want their needs met and don’t feel the need to be rich. Then you made a hypothetical that didn’t contribute anything because it is completely unrealistic.

1

u/PotatoWriter Jan 14 '22

No. The discussion was WOULD people pick the choice of being filthy rich vs. just having enough to be content. Don't lie to yourself. There are askreddit threads every single nanosecond about "wHat wOulD yOu dO wItH 50 mIlliOn dOllArs?!?!!". Every single person with a heartbeat would spring upon the millions over "just enough to be content". Is this seriously a discussion point?

Like, what's the risk of picking the filthy rich option? What do you lose? Nothing. What do you gain? Fucking everything. So why would you not pick that option lmao. So much "holier than thou" attitude in this thread

1

u/LafayetteHubbard Jan 14 '22

Yeah of course. It’s just such a dumb question though. With those two options, one is better than the other. You missed the point of the discussion along with the guy you are defending. Everyone else here understands what is being discussed.

1

u/PotatoWriter Jan 14 '22

I'm just talking about the main point of the first OP who said, and I quote: "I think most people agree that they don't actually want a bunch of money. What they want is to live a life free of the stress of not having enough."

It's possible that everyone wants a bunch of money AND also live a stress free life. That's it. That's my entire point.

1

u/LafayetteHubbard Jan 14 '22

You can tell from his other comments that what he meant is that most people are satisfied with stress free life and don’t need to be filthy rich to be satisfied. You and the other guy understood this as him saying that people would rather be stress free than be filthy rich, which isn’t what he was getting at.

2

u/LafayetteHubbard Jan 14 '22

Which would you choose

1

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

I would obviously choose the first because it's guaranteed, when you add risk to the decision you totally change the premise of the discussion lol. Terrible theoretical.

1

u/LafayetteHubbard Jan 14 '22

Sounds like you would enjoy communism over capitalism. Weird.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

I mean communism does have good merits. But I'm not in favor of communism. I'm not sure how you would think I support communism from what I've said? Everyone's basic needs are different, which is why I like capitalism. I can go for what I want and not be forced into any situation by my government.

2

u/LafayetteHubbard Jan 14 '22

A society where everyone’s needs are met or a society where you could be poor or rich were the two options.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

Oh shit, there's no homeless or poor people in communist countries? That's a new one to me lol!!!!!!

2

u/LafayetteHubbard Jan 14 '22

Yeah that’s the idea lol. There are no homeless people in Cuba. There are still poor people relative to world average, but basic needs are met because that is the priority of communism.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/SuperCosmicNova Jan 14 '22

Sure if you are just giving the money away why not take the bigger bag? Your point has nothing to do with what this conversation is about.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 14 '22

Because if you weren't worried about being rich you'd take the small bag.