Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Divinitas, Apr 12, 2011.
pisses me off that people starve around the world so this guy can have his garage and 4 lambos
5, theres one in the 'normal' garage
I don't think there are people starving SO that this guy can have cars. Don't think world hunger had anything do with him getting a job and earning money, unless he works as a 3rd world dictator in his spare time.
If I had enough money to buy 2 Countachs and 3 diablos, I would too.
aspira some people buy food off the broker, corn or what ever. they also buy the land that u can grow this stuff on to resell it later or sell the food for a high price.
i dont know if this guy has something to do with it but just saying, u never know who buys stocks like corn. espacially after the last summer where half of russia burned and many other things happend these prices go up very high idd
Why did I immediately think about buff food when I saw the word "broker".
u play too many games
Well, i agree with aspira: you can't blame the man from being successfull, but the problem is, in a society, in order for rich people to exist, there has to be poor people
The guy, lets say he worked hard for this and was not born with a silver spoon, why does he need to go overkill like that? If i was filthy rich i doubt i would own anything else than a effing vw golf. Granted i have no interest in cars what so ever but it such a waste of money. He could invest that in some food program or something. How can you do that and not feel bad about it when you see the shit around the world
How do you know he's so rich that he can afford that many cars and still give to charity etc? Assumption is the mother of all fuck-ups.
tbh I wouldn't own 5 lambo's, I would own Aston Martins and maybe one Veyron
Why would you want a bunch of shit cars and an expensive shit car?
speedbump, oh shit!
Aston Martins are hardly shit, look much better than Ferrais or Lambos imo anyway, and the veyron, well wouldn't drive as I'd end up in a lampost, but it would look fucking sweet on my drive
I dunno why, that gallardo vid reminds me of this
Probably because of vids like this :d
not drifting but definately looks awesome (just glad im not the one driving or standing watching it )
EDIT: lol @ the 2nd vid
mmhhh ... mmhhh ... mmhhh.
yes ... and no.
it can be from a moral dilemma to an actual fact or just a bunch of fallacies.
Doodle: people can be rich like that without having to "steal" from others, and sadly, its questionable if a guy this rich should or not have a social duty, from a moral and ethic point of view to share with those who dont have enough for their basic needs.
Aspira: there are many ways for ppl to mess around with others, sometimes with direct consequences or not, like negligence. these are neither certainties nor illusory concepts but generalizations have these problems.
Specter: that's wrong. as history has showed, the "creation" of wealth can be done in many ways, economies are not just some zero-sum games!
my # cents about it:
the wealth of nations is something that has been argued throughout modern history, and if ppl deserve or not to have what they have is in itself a moral logic fallacy, because it will allways depend on what your basic values are, and as such, the result is often devious (pun intended).
should a hard working person, give some of his wealth to those who do not work because they know they can count on it?
should some one that has done nothing to have or has done immoral stuff to get it, share some with those who dont have anything at all?
usually the problem comes from the fact that it is not a problem, but a whole bunch of problems.
its not just about starvation, knowledge, education or gormandize and greediness. its much more, and everything grouped up, a mess i believe its not to be taken here ^^.
people are not really poor just because (if at all), they are dumb, stupid, retarded or ill fated (although this could be a quite remarkable funny discussion), even if at first they might seem it, as (and more important) rich ppl are not allways evil egocentrical snobs.
And the intelect capability of one person doesnt have any fixed correlation to his behaviour "per se", a terrorist with a phd in chemistry or biology doesnt really make him a social peacefull guy, as a monk with one in ethics/philosophy would be usefull for development.
In the end, if a guy has the moral obligation to help, in what extent and how far does this duty spread? why should some1 have to help any1 at all? are we binded by interests' constraints?
i like to think we do, far and wide for no reason at all. but its the same as laughing or being serious about tragedies around the globe, if you are not going to do much anyway, what diference does it make? Its not because ppl starve that we should or not have luxury items, the problem is not what some have, but what others dont. (unless it is a natural conflict, which happens a bit less then what ppl think so.)
freshly wrecked gumpert
http://www.wreckedexotics.com/ <--- Always a good site.
Welcome to the BOON Control
Community Website & Forum!
Separate names with a comma.