Opinion of noblesse oblige

[Indy Texas]

Do the socioeconomic elite in a society have an obligation to look after the welfare of the general public? Or is this too paternalistic?

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

There should not be a socioeconomic elite, so HC.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

The concept is one of the worst ever devised.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

If there is to be a socioeconomic elite, of course they have such an obligation. The problem is that their understanding of what such an obligation actually entails in concrete terms tends to be patronizing, insufficient, or otherwise faulty.

[memphis]

It would be nice of they did, but, as often as not, they don't. Yes, some rich people give millions, or in the case of Bill Gates, billions, to charity, but plenty of non rich people volunteer as much of their time and money as they can too. The spirit of helping others is a common trait in people, but it is by no means universal, and is certainly not limited to those with means.

[Antonio the Sixth]

There should not be a socioeconomic elite, so HC.

[Franzl]

The concept is one of the worst ever devised.

No, it's basic human decency to see a moral obligation to help those in need if you're easily in a position to do so.

[dead0man]

The concept is one of the worst ever devised.

No, it's basic human decency to see a moral obligation to help those in need if you're easily in a position to do so.

Indeed.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

The concept is one of the worst ever devised.

No, it's basic human decency to see a moral obligation to help those in need if you're easily in a position to do so.

Indeed.

It's human decency, but it is not an obligation. And 99.99% of the wealthy (and people in general) in the world do help other people through charity whenever they can afford it.

[TNF]

There should not be a socioeconomic elite, so HC.

[Lief 🗽]

Of course I support such a thing, but it seems like it would be more efficient to just cut out the middleman.

And if we're going to cut out the middleman, I know just the device:

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The concept is one of the worst ever devised.

No, it's basic human decency to see a moral obligation to help those in need if you're easily in a position to do so.

Indeed.

It's human decency, but it is not an obligation.

Personally I think it's more than a little suspect to say, essentially, that people don't have to be decent if they don't feel like it, but whatever.

[PiMp DaDdy FitzGerald]

It is a good concept, but unenforcable.