Try the political quiz
@ISIDEWITHQuestions2yrs ago

What does being 'rich' or 'poor' mean to you, and how would these concepts change in a classless society?

+
Expand
+ Settings

Engaged Voters

These active users have achieved a basic understanding of terms and definitions related to the topic of

@FluentSnipe
#1 Engaged Voter
@9VK759Q
#2 Engaged Voter
Test Your Knowledge

6 Replies

 @9RN43KK from Washington  answered…2yrs2Y

Rich are those that don't have any need to work as their passive income can sustain their lifestyle. In a classless society, there would be no necessity to work, you would only work if you chose to.

 @9KD8NYVIndependent from Texas  answered…2yrs2Y

To be rich is to have monetary wealth that allows for one to live above the average standard. A rich person can easily afford optional and unnecessary luxuries, on top of having their necessities met. Meanwhile, to be poor is to have extremely little monetary wealth, living just below the average standard. A poor person can barely afford their basic necessities if at all.

 @9KD82GWanswered…2yrs2Y

They don’t mean anything to me because people is human all people is human

 @9KD8C62 from Georgia  answered…2yrs2Y

Rich have money, and the poor don't. In a classless society, these concepts still would reside, for as long as someone has more money than someone, that person will still hold the leash.

 @9KD84XT from Texas  answered…2yrs2Y

To be rich is to be privileged whether it is gained from oneself or not. To be poor is not to be without privileged but to have less to offer. I believe we would still have classes in our society, just without labels.

 @9KD82QR from North Carolina  answered…2yrs2Y

Rich means you have great amounts of money and don’t really have to worry about bills or taxes and don’t have a care in the world. Poor means the opposite

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

Elizabeth Warren Walks Back Murder Comments

Congressional Democrats broadly denounced the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson Friday morning, after Republicans started accusing Sen. Elizabeth Warren of excusing violence.“No one's condoning this,” said Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.). “Violence never is the right answer for anything. And it was a horrible murder, a tragic loss for his family.” Warren this week condemned the shooting, but added that people “can be pushed only so far.”"We'll say it over and over," Warren said on MSNBC’S “The ReidOut.” " Violence is never the answer. This guy [Luigi Mangione] gets a trial who's allegedly killed the CEO of UnitedHealth, but you can only push people so far, and then they start to take matters into their own hands."In a statement to POLITICO, Warren said, “Violence is never the answer. Period. I should have been much clearer that there is never a justification for murder.” Top Republicans denounced Warren's comments and the walked-back rhetoric, with House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) calling it “inappropriate and dangerous.”Some House Democrats asked about the incident on Thursday pivoted the conversation to discuss policy options on health care or gun safety.“I don't really know that this is really a space that Congress normally weighs in on,” said Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas). “But at the end of the day, I think it’s an opportunity, because now people are talking about health care and to talk about the fact that this industry has honestly not been as helpful as it could be.”“Violence is never the answer,” said Rep. Troy Carter (D-La.). “We know that there are people suffering, there’s great challenges in healthcare. There's great challenges, and people have, in fact, been wronged, but a process of governance is the way to address that, not violence.”And Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) who denounced the murder, said the killer should be prosecuted and that “I do know that allegedly a ghost gun was used, and we should also ban ghost guns. There's no reason for them beyond the streets.”

▲  1614 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

Israeli Bombings Kill 2,300 In Lebanon in 3 weeks

Lebanese authorities say Israeli bombing has killed more than 2,300 people and injured almost 11,000, mostly in the past three weeks, with Israeli attacks reaching areas far beyond Hizbollah’s traditional bastions of support in the south.The Israeli military has ordered people living in more than a quarter of Lebanon to flee, according to a UN calculation, as its fight with the Iran-backed Shia militant group Hizbollah threatens to engulf the Mediterranean country.Lebanese authorities say Israeli bombing has killed more than 2,300 people and injured almost 11,000, mostly in the past three weeks, with Israeli attacks reaching areas far beyond Hizbollah’s traditional bastions of support in the south.More than 1mn people have fled their homes in Lebanon in under a month, according to its government, a dramatic forced movement of the population in a country of only about 5mn inhabitants with a land mass smaller than the US state of Connecticut. Israeli forces began a ground offensive in south Lebanon two weeks ago, in their fourth invasion of the country in under five decades. They had already destroyed large parts of the densely populated southern Beirut suburb where Hizbollah had its headquarters, and killed many top militant commanders in air strikes, including former leader Hassan Nasrallah.Rema Jamous Imseis, Middle East director of UNHCR, told journalists in Geneva that “over 25 per cent of [Lebanon is] under a direct Israeli military evacuation order”. “People are heeding these calls to evacuate and they’re fleeing with almost nothing,” she added, saying that 80 per cent of the shelters opened by the Lebanese government — mostly in schools — were now full.

▲  1012 replies