Union pulls support for Obamacare, a sign of things to come?

[David88vert]

I do not think the creators of angry birds are necessarily living a better life (ie, more valuable to society, admirable, etc) than a humble priest just because they get paid a hell of a lot more.

The government would say that the creators of Angry Birds are worth more to the government. They get lots of tax revenue off them, but nothing from the tax-exempt priests.

Atheists probably think that the game creators are worth more as well.

People of the priest's faith probably value the priests more, but their kids probably value the game creators more.

Point is - people value what is more closely related to their day to day lives, and we are all different in our values. Even though all life should be valued the same, it rarely is.

[bu villain]

The government would say that the creators of Angry Birds are worth more to the government. They get lots of tax revenue off them, but nothing from the tax-exempt priests.

Atheists probably think that the game creators are worth more as well.

People of the priest's faith probably value the priests more, but their kids probably value the game creators more.

Point is - people value what is more closely related to their day to day lives, and we are all different in our values. Even though all life should be valued the same, it rarely is.

Exactly, but Vteck seems to be stating that economic value is the only factor that people consider in their choices and that it is the single metric we should judge value by.

[Vteckidd]

Exactly, but Vteck seems to be stating that economic value is the only factor that people consider in their choices and that it is the single metric we should judge value by.

no, im saying that is the most important metric people operate by when considering their choices, and is the largest metric we should judge value by.

Do you want a nation of people who strive to be MCEEDEES workers, or MILLIONAIRES?

Simple answer, if you were offered the SAME JOB you have now, making $20k a year more, but you had to work with an asshole boss, would you do it? 9/10 would. Wonder why? Wheres their nobility?

"Honor is in the dollar kid"

[bu villain]

Im not arguing that there arent doctors out there who LOVE to get paid $30k a year and just help children in need. But thats not the NORM. Its noble, but its not indicative of our society as a whole.

Those aren't the only two possibilities though. There are all sorts of shades of grey. There are tons of doctors who accept $170k instead of $190k because they want to work in Atlanta instead of NYC, or because they want to treat children instead of the elderly, or because they want to perform life saving operations and not cosmetic operations.

no, im saying that is the most important metric people operate by when considering their choices, and is the largest metric we should judge value by.

Even if I agreed, I don't think it's like 90%money/10% everything else, it's probably more like 40%money/20%work environment/20%location/20%everything else. Value is a much more personal thing so I don't think you can make such a broad generalization about it. Some people value money very little, others quite a bit.

Do you want a nation of people who strive to be MCEEDEES workers, or MILLIONAIRES?

Doesn't matter what I want. People decide for themselves what they want to strive for.

Simple answer, if you were offered the SAME JOB you have now, making $20k a year more, but you had to work with an asshole boss, would you do it? 9/10 would. Wonder why? Wheres their nobility?

I guess I am in the 10% then because I certainly wouldn't. I also think there would be a lot more than 10% who would agree with me. Also the 20k is an arbitrary number. Certainly a large number of people wouldn't make that deal if their salary only increased 1 or 2%.