is it force if ppl come to believe or know that justly limited fortunes is justice peace deomcracy safety etc?

Question

i am talking about changing minds, not force - i am talking about the possibility that justly limited fortunes IS greater happiness for everyone - that we are making an error - that correcting this error [mindset] can enhance our lives enormously - i am talking about ppl freely thoughtfully coming to WANT justly limited fortunes, for good sound reasons - i am talking about ppl sorting thru their understanding & seeing that they already believe & know justly limited fortunes is correct & good & extremely in their interests
the world is very complex & we have many mental ways of making it more complex, & failing to see the big patterns - ie, the lesson of history, that the state built on injustice cannot stand, & what exactly is injustice & what isnt
EVEN IF U WERE TO BE THE MOST OVERPAID, wd u choose the way things r, with super hyper extreme range of pay/hr violence misery disorder escalating to extinction soon, or moderate range of pay/hr, & happiness [peace liberty frat...]??????

Answer 1

If everyone was freely doing everything to make a perfect world, what is stopping everyone from slacking just a little bit trying to take advantage of everyone else's good will.

While I would like to believe everyone is good at heart, economics provides tools to ensure that people act in societies best interest whether or not you believe in societies objectives.

Getting everyone to agree enough about social goals to act together freely is a worthy objective, but not in the realm of reasonablity or forseeable applicablity. Until that time, I would rather rely on proven economic principles then pies in the sky. Christianity among other religions, have been trying for thousands of years to impliment the values you aspouse. While I encourage futher effort in this area, I also feel people of good will should learn to use economics as a tool to see what is feasible and how we can make REAL progress in ending poverty.

Justice and complete economic equality are not completely the same, however wealthy people of goodwill have done exactly what you say: giving large portions of their wealth to charities. This does not mean people should abbandon intellegent investment which is insuring our future, but instead reducing personal consumption so that others can eat.

The ownership of capital is a responsiblity, since it provides other individuals the means to their livelihood. It is not just to sell your tractor and give the money to the farm hand, and tell him that he should buy his own tractor if he wants to continue working. It is not just for a CEO to devest in his company to feed Uganda for a week, when the collapse in the stock price could cost your employees their retirement. Wealth is largely capital and capital is what allows the few rich countries to remain rich.

You have a good heart, but you don't understand economics.

Answer 2

there is no sizeable argument that is made to help that idea. also, "freemarket capitalism" and "restricted fortunes" are contradictory words. also, you advise that there replaced into some time at the same time as freemarket capitalism, democracy, peace, liberty & justice for all exisited to a significantly better degree than they do now. at the same time as replaced into that? And were fortunes "justly restricted" on the instantaneous more advantageous than they are literally? also, many right here might want to be properly served to tell apart between the introduction of wealth and the distribution of wealth. To posit that wealth isn't created, yet is in basic terms moved from one man or woman to a unique, is as igorant an economic idea as i visit conceive. research our life to the lives of persons 50, one hundred, or a million,000 years in the past and also you ought to on the instantaneous comprehend how ridiculous that idea is.