Forum menu
No, it's red.
The colour of success....
Green and white ffs... so she's a Catholic now? Oy, and indeed, Vey.
Actually there's a Deportivo Cali top kicking about somewhere, let me have a rummage....
Elfinsafety.
Yeah got the morals bit the wrong way round - typo, sorry.
Define earned?...hard to do, like i said in the previous post what constitutes 'earned' back then will be seen as theft by todays standards.
Some wealthy families made their money during Empire by exploiting people and resources from foreign countries...at the time it was seen as legit and nothing wrong with it...today its rightly frowned upon.
Conversely some 'old money' families have made a mint through legitimate means which would stand up to modern day scrutiny.
What i cant stand about so called modern and fair society is how bitter and spiteful people get about inherited money and the obsession with the class system.
Some people exploited single mothers and used them as drug runners, then stole their football tops, thinking they were Plymouth Argyle kit. It doesn't make it right though. 🙁
What i cant stand about so called modern and fair society is how bitter and spiteful people get about inherited money and the obsession with the class system.
😯
I think the issue is that under the current system, society isn't 'fair'; it's the perpetuation of inequality by the monarchy and class system that makes it so. Sure, society will never be entirely egalitarian, but ours is particularly unequal because those at the top of the pile ensure that the status quo remains so, as it favours them personally, rather than society as a whole.
Human Nature, granted, but i'd like to see a more even playing filed, personally. Let the aristocracy have to fight their way up same as everyone else. What's wrong with that?
In a 100m sprint, all athletes start at exactly the same distance from the line. Those cheating are disqualified. No-one has any advantage over the others, other than individual ability.
I think those at the top fear that if the playing field were level, they would not be able to hold onto wealth and power in the way they do, so they manipulate the situation to suit their own ends. Obviously.
does not in any way make for the most just, exciting, progressive and rewarding society. Just prolongs the stagnation...
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
Thats just it though Elfinsafety, the aristocracy did fight their way up....just not in your life time or mine....thats why it is called 'old money' and bitching about it hundreds of years later is rather sad dont you think?
Are you proposing a system with no inherited wealth, whereby everybody starts from zero?....what would happen to somebody's wealth after they die in that scenario?....no opportunity or means to pass things on to offspring seems very mean.
Like i said earlier, where do you draw the line?....do you stop my parents from leaving me their house?
Thats just it though Elfinsafety, the aristocracy did [b]fight[/b] their way up....
🙄
bitching about it hundreds of years later is rather sad dont you think?
Erm, no. I think just rolling over and accepting things without question, in spite of them not being fair, just or equal, just because thinking about them is too much effort, quite pathetic.
It's our duty as members of a society to always challenge what we believe to be wrong. Otherwise, Humanity can never progress.
Britain is suffering because it's stuck with an archaic old dinosaur of a system of social organisation. Other nations have successfully cast off the shackles of inherited power, and aren't doing too bad, so why can't we?
The dinosaurs died out cos they were unable to adapt and survive. We're floundering in the mud, while other successfully mutated forms wait gleefully to feast on our rotting carcass...
[img] 
[/img]
thats why it is called 'old money' and bitching about it hundreds of years later is rather sad dont you think?
If I rob a country of all its wealth how long does it take before I can call this "old money" and call those I stole [ or their offspring] moaners?
Paassage of time does not magically right wrongs.
Are you proposing a system with no inherited wealth,
are you moving the goal posts in a debate about the monarchy ?
Are you proposing a system with no inherited wealth
Inherited power and inherited wealth are two different things.
Actually the inherited wealth thing is an interesting point. Clearly if the proponents of the status quo are right, there is absolutely no need for it obviously. The cream will obviously rise to the surface regardless, especially given all the advantages they will receive even without the inheritance.