Say you had a net worth of over 400million dollars. And you basically impregnate over 50women that are just Fucking amazing physically. Would you just stop at 50? Is it moral to just stop at 50?

That's a valid problem, actually.

It's hard to decide on what's the moral limit (a million, a billion, a trillion dollars?), but there's a point in which your success may be hindering the possibility of progress/survival for others. I'm not sure there's an uncontroversial way to come with this moral ceiling: If you earn twice the average of your fellow countrymen? 10 times more than the global average? More money than you could possibly spend? I'm inclined to stick to this last question as a guide to how much money is immoral, although that's just as random.

If I were loaded like, let's say, Bill Gates, I'd probably feel it's morally wrong to use the money just for myself - reason why he's now fighting a crusade against polio himself. Not because of the figures, but because it's painfully obvious you can't use all that money with one's self even if you wanted to, so you might as well help those who need.

As for having a harem, if all people involved are okay with it, I don't see how that could be immoral though. Sure, 49 blokes would be left with nothing but their hands, but if the women involved would rather be with you than with them, forcing them to choose these poor fellows over you sounds even more immoral than being loaded.

Do you replace harem's after a certain age? What do you do with them?

quote:

Originally posted by zGoogleman Do you replace harem's after a certain age? What do you do with them?

Well, I reckon it's like marriage, except you have thousands of in-laws, rather than just a handful

Would you discard a wife after she reaches a certain age? Remember: Hell hath no fury like an army of women scorned!

quote:

Originally posted by Lira That's a valid problem, actually. It's hard to decide on what's the moral limit (a million, a billion, a trillion dollars?), but there's a point in which your success may be hindering the possibility of progress/survival for others. I'm not sure there's an uncontroversial way to come with this moral ceiling: If you earn twice the average of your fellow countrymen? 10 times more than the global average? More money than you could possibly spend? I'm inclined to stick to this last question as a guide to how much money is immoral, although that's just as random.

That's the thing, I don't think that having money itself is bad at any stage except for during it's acquisition. I think there should just be high wages and tax rates in the first place. I fail to see how economically someone's success can hinder the success of others. What if someone decided to buy 3/4 of the gold in the world and stick it in the ground with their wealth? That isn't going to do much except for raise gold prices plus pay some labour to move all your gold.

With that said, personally if it were me I'd certainly opt for philanthropy and encourage it among others. I wouldn't go so far as to say that someone not doing that is wrong though. It either shouldn't be possible legally (through taxes or forced philanthropy) or it should be ok in my opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira If I were loaded like, let's say, Bill Gates, I'd probably feel it's morally wrong to use the money just for myself - reason why he's now fighting a crusade against polio himself. Not because of the figures, but because it's painfully obvious you can't use all that money with one's self even if you wanted to, so you might as well help those who need.

There's more to spending money than just personal goods/properties. He doesn't need to have 40 million dollars in houses. There's always some sortof power he could use money to gain/influence, whether that's a political thing, a company or some sortof real aid organisation. Steve jobs certainly seemed to be perfectly happy not donating to charity ever for instance. Most businessmen seem to mostly just use their money to generate more money and power.

quote:

Originally posted by zGoogleman Do you replace harem's after a certain age? What do you do with them?

Well if they're a slave presumably they go back to doing slave like duties. Like word processing.

___________________
Check out my Goa mix and Darkpsy Mixes here

Those that havew money for no other reason than to generate more money. I consider that perhaps not immoral but incredibly bad taste.

___________________
"This is why Superman works alone." GC
old stuff from days gone by (2001-2004)
Mad For Brad's gay little contest

Why the fuck would you ever, ever wanna impregnate a woman? Doesn't the world have enough losers as it is? Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit

quote:

Originally posted by Lira Well, I reckon it's like marriage, except you have thousands of in-laws, rather than just a handful Would you discard a wife after she reaches a certain age? Remember: Hell hath no fury like an army of women scorned!

I would discard my wife after she reaches a certain age. I'll take my chances with her scorn.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherWay83 Why the fuck would you ever, ever wanna impregnate a woman? Doesn't the world have enough losers as it is? Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit

Well if you can support them all, I guess it would be ok. Someone should just kill all the poor people's children so they won't turn to crime or drainage. Poor people give rise to bad governments, not the rich or middle-class.

quote:

Originally posted by AnotherWay83 Why the fuck would you ever, ever wanna impregnate a woman? Doesn't the world have enough losers as it is? Shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit

maybe because its our genetic purpose in life

Wouldn't child support take a percentage of your wealth? Or is it just a flat rate?

if i had 400 million bucks, i'd be on a first name basis with every ho on the planet.