The Forum > Article Comments > Loneliness, depression and Olympic fairy-tale endings > Comments
Loneliness, depression and Olympic fairy-tale endings : Comments
By Kay Stroud, published 7/8/2012It's hard to win, but even harder to lose.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- Page 2
-
- All
agreed, though I'd settle for just bringing the super rich down to Earth.
DavidF,
The main change I have in mind is erradicating extreme disparity, mainly extremes of wealth vested in individuals, which I can find no philosophical or rational defence for. There ought to be a limit to how much money, ergo power and influence, any individual can amass. I agree with your sentiments and don't presume to prescribe any "ideal" society. in fact don't believe it's possible to achieve one; the human condition will always be prey to natural hardship and contingency, no matter how well organised. Your Stoic dictum, WMTrevor, prepare for the worst, seems much more rational to me.
Nevertheless, putting a cap on wealth would effectively change the world. I don't argue the wealth should be redistributed either; the furphy of higher living standards, unearned, for all. What's wrong with an elegant sufficiency for all? Welfare and consumerism make us artificially-remote from the kind of exigency that drove our biological and social evolution, thus we grow fat and complacent, and/or disturbed.
And yet we're so conditioned to this "natural" order of things (the filthy rich are not only condoned, they're given credit for the comparative prosperity we all enjoy. As if insatiable greed and self-interest are the only productive "values" to base political economy on) that such perfectly reasonable observations are deemed "radical".
Changing the subject, I recently opined that the arts should not be supported by government coffers. It's a conflict of interest; the Arts are meant to be avant garde. But neither should sport be subsidised by the taxpayer. The sporting elite are also co-opted, through the wealth and fame they amass, to support hegemony.