How to stop demonizing stage orange

[soos_mite_ah]

I'm trying to integrate stage orange in a healthy way and I do see many of the positives associated with the stage. However, I have a huge hang up when it comes to accepting capitalism and neoliberalism (I'm mostly fine with most all other aspects of orange except these two things). I don't catch myself being judgmental towards stage red, blue, green, or yellow but I do catch myself getting triggered over orange for this reason. I can't help but feel that much of the reason why many people are stuck at stage red and blue is because of a lack of proper resources due to poor distribution systemically and therefore they use harsh means to meet their survival needs. A lot of green's excesses is due to the backlash and anger from poor distribution. I can empathize with  red, blue, and green, with minimal judgement (I have a couple hang ups here and there, I'm not perfect)  but it all seems like to comes back to capitalism being problematic. I would go as far to say that a lot of my empathy for the other stages is rooted in my disdain for the limits of capitalism. 

I can see why capitalism is a thing from studying history and I do see it as another stage of development, one step above feudalism  which I would characterize as a stage blue economic system. I try to have this view while still being able to discern the problems with capitalism however i do find myself sometimes crossing the line from discernment to judgement. I'm currently studying business, specifically finance, in college rn and I would say that has definitely helped me integrate more orange, however, it doesn't feel like enough and I still feel like I'm missing something.  

[Artsu]

Do you live in an orange society?

[Recursoinominado]

I noticed that a lot of green people have not integrated orange yet and this come from limiting belief about money, success and entrepreneurship.

Most greens I know demonize rich people, specially millionaires, billionaires, big businesses like Amazon, Apple etc.

The problem, in my opinion is to see only the toxic side of orange. For instance, it became mainstream to shit on Jeff Benzos for having a almost inconceivable amount of money, they see it as a zero sum game, if he have a lot of money, he must have taken from the poor. Which is naive and narrow-minded to say the least. 

They shit on capitalism not recognizing the insane societal advancement it brought to us the last 200 years.

The other day I saw a green stage post shitting on billionaire saying that they became billionaires by two paths: inheritance or exploring the shit out of the little man. They don't see all the hard work, focus and vision it took to get there. They shit on Bill Gates for "only" donating something like 500 million dollars to help the poor and this is a bad thing because he has a lot more, meanwhile, they can't see that bill gates did more to mankind that they will ever do. Can you imagine a world without Microsoft/Windows? Can you imagine something like that being created in a non-capitalistc society?

It is very ironic to me seeing green people talking shit about Bill Gates from their PC or Apple from their iPhones.

Edited July 31, 2020 by Recursoinominado

[soos_mite_ah]

@Artsu  Yes if you want to characterize much of the U.S. as orange . And i go to a pretty orange college as well. where that stage is glorified by much of the student body.   

[Rilles]

Integrating Orange is seeing its limits and its good sides. You dont have to love neo-liberalism. 

[soos_mite_ah]

3 minutes ago, Recursoinominado said:

For instance, it became mainstream to shit on Jeff Benzos for having a almost inconceivable amount of money, they see it as a zero sum game, if he have a lot of money, he must have taken from the poor. Which is naive and narrow-minded to say the least. 

Definately guilty of demonizing Jeff Bezos. However, seeing it as a  zero sum game is not entirely accurate . You can make money without exploiting people, but from what I get is that it's difficult to do so. Even if you're not the big CEO that is exploiting workers, simply buying something off of Amazon is voting with your dollar, and therefore in support of it.  I feel that the whole "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism" is partially true because we are all interconnected but there is a lack of agency when it comes to what other choices you have, which is largely a systemic problem.  

7 minutes ago, Recursoinominado said:

They shit on Bill Gates for "only" donating something like 500 million dollars to help the poor and this is a bad thing because he has a lot more, meanwhile, they can't see that bill gates did more to mankind that they will ever do. Can you imagine a world without Microsoft/Windows? Can you imagine something like that being created in a non-capitalistc society?

Yeah I agree that capitalism gave way to a lot of societal and technological advancement. I would say that is one of my favorite parts of orange. With the "only" donating 500 million dollars, I don't think its a bad thing as an individual deed, but systemically, it would be more efficient to tax billionaires a hefty amount so we don't have to rely on their philanthropy to get money for different sectors of public well being. Like, good for Bill Gates for having a moral compass to help the poor but this is the exception to the way billionaires spend their money, not the norm. A lot of the wealth is hoarded

 

I'm just articulating my thought process so that yall have more to go off on in regards to where my hand ups are. 

[Recursoinominado]

29 minutes ago, soos_mite_ah said:

A lot of the wealth is hoarded

Of course, tax the shit out of them, create social policies that stimulate the circulation of money, especially from super-rich people.

Money should absolutely be circulating, not being hoarded but we also lack the experience of being a billionaire, maybe they have plans with that money, we don't know, maybe when it is said that Jeff Benzos has a net worth of 170B, it doesn't mean that he has that money on some bank account, I am no expert by I would bet that he doesn't have instant access to not even 20% of that money. Maybe someone more knowledgeable on the subject can explain it better. But for sure most people imagine that those billionaires have all that money without doing anything with it. 

Also, you absolutely have to EARN your success, as Charlie Munger said: “To get what you want, you have to deserve what you want. The world is not yet a crazy enough place to reward a whole bunch of undeserving people.”

Recognize that when you see with a lot of money, it is certain that they also provided a proportional value to society in a way or another.

As you said, it is easy to shit on Amazon for not treating their employees with the respect they deserve but it is not so easy to chose to pay more for the same product in another site that will not provide the same quality of service.

For instance, it is common knowledge that Apple has people working in semi-slavery conditions in China to make their products but how many people would abstain from buying one of the best smartphones you can buy for a moral principle?

[soos_mite_ah]

1 hour ago, Recursoinominado said:

Recognize that when you see with a lot of money, it is certain that they also provided a proportional value to society in a way or another.

I would argue that a lot of jobs that don't make a lot of money such as teachers and nurses  who are responsible for educating the youth  and maintaining the well being of the population are more valuable than say a star athlete who plays football just for entertainment. If teachers and nurses quit tomorrow, the world would be in absolute chaos while if all star athletes quit, sure it would be sad and some people would take it hard but the world isn't going to explode. 

However, I will say I can see that there is more scarcity in regards to being a star athlete than to being a teacher and there is a demand for star athletes since society values entertainment greatly. I guess what society deems valuable also has to do with the developmental stage of that society.   

It's the whole argument in regards to why diamonds are more expensive than water even though water is  a need.  Because of supply and demand along with the law of  diminishing marginal utility, intrinsic value becomes secondary to the subjective value we assign them

That said, society would greatly benefit if we valued education and healthcare more and therefore invested in our teachers and nurses. That would greatly increase productivity and the skills people can acquire which in turn would help the economy greatly. 

Which is one of the reasons why i guess i go back to my more green argument of investing in social infrastructure more and therefore start looping back to critiquing capitalism. 

Edited July 31, 2020 by soos_mite_ah

[soos_mite_ah]

@hyruga No one said that Bill Gates himself  is only orange. We're just talking about his billionaire status and how his innovations were possible because of capitalism. The main reason he can donate more than the average joe is because he has more than the average joe 

[Nahm]

@soos_mite_ah

Start a company which employees at least ten people, and helps their families to eat, have medical & dental coverage, a retirement plan, etc. Also, construct the company in such a way that they are unlimited in terms of how much money they can make, and how many other families in kind they can assist.

Alternatively, recognize arrogance, fear, and projection, then invent the next new ‘better than capitalism’. 

I’m all for that. 

I predict the inevitable outcome to be that of you no longer demonizing yourself.  

 

[Recursoinominado]

18 minutes ago, soos_mite_ah said:

I would argue that a lot of jobs that don't make a lot of money such as teachers and nurses  who are responsible for educating the youth  and maintaining the well being of the population are more valuable than say a star athlete who plays football just for entertainment. If teachers and nurses quit tomorrow, the world would be in absolute chaos while if all star athletes quit, sure it would be sad and some people would take it hard but the world isn't going to explode. 

However, I will say I can see that there is more scarcity in regards to being a star athlete than to being a teacher and there is a demand for star athletes since society values entertainment greatly. I guess what society deems valuable also has to do with the developmental stage of that society.   

It's the whole argument in regards to why diamonds are more expensive than water even though water is  a need.  Because of supply and demand along with the law of  diminishing marginal utility, intrinsic value becomes secondary to the subjective value we assign them

Exactly, you answered yourself.

How easy is to substitute 8th-grade math teacher? Or a nurse?

Yeah, you could say that they provide good high-conscious value but the scale that they provide is really small. There are teachers, for instance, that make millions of dollars if they know how to explore their talents, commit to mastery, teach in an efficient way, can market it etc. See, Leo can be considered a teacher and it is certain that he makes a lot more money than your average 8th-grade teacher because he provides a lot more value not just individually but to humanity as a whole. I mean, really, how useful was all your math education throughout school and how useful can be a 30h Life Purpose course that Leo provides, for instance?

IF you think about it, a lot of people really do care a LOT about sports, in a way they are like art. Yeah, you could live without it, they aren't as essential as engineer skills, let's say, but is life really worth living without art?

How can we place a price in art or sports? 

[JosephKnecht]

2 hours ago, soos_mite_ah said:

I'm trying to integrate stage orange in a healthy way and I do see many of the positives associated with the stage.

The only way to integrate a stage is to go through the stage. Once you pass through the stage, you integrate it as a part of your being.

If you have negative projections on stage orange, that means that you are still missing some aspects of orange.

2 hours ago, soos_mite_ah said:

Definately guilty of demonizing Jeff Bezos.

Why demonize him? He started with nothing, then sold books to the world and now he created a global business that can deliver your material wish on a click of a button. He made our lives much easier. Put yourself in his shoes, and imagine everything he had to go through to arrive at the present. Its easy to see the success, but you don't understand his struggles in getting to where he is.

2 hours ago, soos_mite_ah said:

it would be more efficient to tax billionaires a hefty amount so we don't have to rely on their philanthropy to get money for different sectors of public well being. 

 Ask yourself, who can better spend their money, Jeff Bezos or the Government? If you become a billionaire one day, would you rather have the government redistribute your wealth or you personally would want to have a choice in which way you would want to spend your money? 

[soos_mite_ah]

30 minutes ago, JosephKnecht said:

The only way to integrate a stage is to go through the stage. Once you pass through the stage, you integrate it as a part of your being.

If you have negative projections on stage orange, that means that you are still missing some aspects of orange.

Why demonize him? He started with nothing, then sold books to the world and now he created a global business that can deliver your material wish on a click of a button. He made our lives much easier. Put yourself in his shoes, and imagine everything he had to go through to arrive at the present. Its easy to see the success, but you don't understand his struggles in getting to where he is.

I try to see the limits of each stages but I'm not going to deny that some of my negative perceptions are projections. I'm just trying to see how I can incorporate those missing aspects 

As far as demonizing Bezos, I fell into that trap because of how little he pays his workers to where many of them don't make a living wage. And it's not like he's not capable either. He is literally sitting on his billions like "I don't know what to do with all this money..."

Also he became a figure head of people getting extremely wealthy while not considering their own employees. I wouldn't say that i demonize Bezos for being Bezos. Amazon is brilliant and I can admire the amount of hard work that it takes to create a company like that. I would say i fell into the trap of demonizing what Bezos symbolizes rather than who he is as a person. Also, in regards to symbolism it's also irritating that he doesn't have to pay in taxes but I mean that's more of a government policy thing rather than a him thing. 

37 minutes ago, JosephKnecht said:

Ask yourself, who can better spend their money, Jeff Bezos or the Government? If you become a billionaire one day, would you rather have the government redistribute your wealth or you personally would want to have a choice in which way you would want to spend your money? 

On average, because of the tendency to hoard wealth, I believe that the government is better at spending the money because they actually put it to use. However, government spending is a whole thing on its own especially in regards to how much of the U.S. budget is spent on the military vs everything else. Because of that, I can see the temptation  to want to personally choose how to spend my money so that i can donate more towards things like healthcare and education. Then again, everyone sees themselves as the good guy and as someone who is un-corruptible. 

However, even if I have a shit ton of money to do that, there needs to be some type of systemic backing for it so funding it isn't reliant on a couple of individuals. One person choosing how to spend that amount of money can get really corrupt (for instance, Mike Bloomberg, who didn't attend a single democratic debate and just spent $500 million on ads and then managed to literally buy electoral votes) and because of that I believe that redistribution is a better, more sustainable path. 

I can also see how psychologically high taxes and that amount of wealth can impact someone. I touched on it with the notion of being immune to corruption but I can also see aversion in regards to having that much money be taken from you. People are more likely to focus on how much they lose than how much they have left, and you're more likely to view wealth in comparative terms and a large part of that is a survival mechanism. So if you have $500 billion dollars but are taxed $499 billion while being left with $1 billion, you're more likely to relatively look at the $499 than the $1 billion you have left. Even if you have that much left, it is tiny compared to the $499 that you just lost. But then again, i think it's important to be conscious of your position, your ego, and how that money is being used. I get that not everyone can do that, but i still think it is necessary. 

[Raphael]

I consider myself as being mostly at stage orange/green.

I want to become a millionaire because I'm poor. It will allow me to quit the place where I live, travel, meet interesting people, in summary, to have more opportunities and freedom to self-actualize. Of course, if the richest people in the world where redistributing more money, it would greatly help me to get started, but it is not the case because they are not conscious enough, so I have to do it by myself.

Being a millionaire will also help me for enlightenment because I need a proper financial foundation to support myself.

However, after enlightenment, I don't know what I will do. If I have a lot of money available, I can create systems to help others to self-actualize. Endless chasing just for success looks futile and dissatisfying, accumulating wealth is more satisfying if it is used to build infrastructures to help mankind to evolve.

Concerning the exploitation, it existed since the dawn of time. Stage orange is actually the first one to stop classic slavery. Of course, working 60h per week is also a form of slavery but it's better than the exploitation that happened at previous stages where people were working until their death without receiving anything in return. Stage orange is actually less exploitative than the previous stages, but its environmental impact is much more concerning.

Stage orange can also have incredible work ethics. At the beginning of Amazon, Jeff Bezos had working days that would end up at midnight or 1 - 2 AM. I currently work with someone who wakes up at 6 and continues to work until 11 PM - 12 PM because he is so concerned about satisfying its clients.

All the technologies and luxuries that we have today and that we are currently using to communicate even if we live on different continents exist thank to stage orange.

Stage orange is a necessity and is on what green is built on and will continue to be built on in the future.

Edited July 31, 2020 by Raphael

[soos_mite_ah]

36 minutes ago, datamonster said:

capitalism in practice is much more complicated and there are degrees of capitalism and free-market. Some countries are more economically free than others.

The problem in my opinion is not the capitalist system, but rather greed. Greed is not an attribute of the system. It is a characteristic of people. Greedy people will use capitalism towards selfish ends.

100% agree. Greed is there no matter what and capitalism is simply the present day tool of it all. It was definitely there before capitalism and manifested previously through stage red pursuits of conquering land for resources etc. 

I guess seeing capitalism as a tool that people use, like how religion is a tool, is a better way of looking at it rather than demonizing it. Like a knife. You can cut vegetables with it and make a nice meal or you could stab someone. Either way, its just another tool, what matters is how its used. With religion for example, there are plenty of people who use the tool in a healthy way so that they can have a sense of peace and guidance but there are plenty of people who uses religion as a tool to politically rally people and divide groups. Capitalism as a tool needs to be regulated so that people don't go over board, just how countries separate church and state for instance. 

41 minutes ago, datamonster said:

Countries that have a very free market include Singapore, New Zealand, Scandinavia, Germany, etc.

Countries that don't have a free market: North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, etc.

I don't know about you, but I would not want to live in any of the lower countries on this list.

Again, I agree. But the above countries also have a lot of structures that limit capitalism so that it is there, but in a healthier way. It goes back to regulating capitalism rather than demonizing i suppose. 

[soos_mite_ah]

@Raphael I mean yeah that kind of work ethic especially towards a higher purpose is incredibly admirable. There are a lot of practical concerns as well in regards to sustaining yourself especially when working towards enlightenment. I definitely want to work towards similar goals as well in regards to financial stability and giving back by creating projects that better humanity. Accumulating for the sake of accumulating seems like a waste of time and energy, and unfortunately, a lot of people try to get rich for similar reasons, not to better humanity. I have nothing against millionaires, its when you're at or near a billion that bothers me because there is no way you can be spending that much money for yourself. 

[soos_mite_ah]

Also my other thing is neoliberalism in other countries and how it deals with foreign affairs. Like there are so many violent conflicts that start just for the accumulation of more and more resources. The way cheap labor is used abroad is messed up because it commodifies people into disposable machines instead of seeing them as human beings. And finally, many diseases that are present in developing nations like HIV/AIDs have treatment but people aren't willing to help them because it's "too expensive" and "not on the budget"  when its actually totally doable. The thing that bothers me the most is how profits get prioritized over peoples general well being and human rights. I know that's not everywhere in all cases but it is a large consequence

[Forestluv]

1 hour ago, datamonster said:

Countries that have a very free market include New Zealand, Scandinavia, Germany, etc.

These countries are capitalist / socialist hybrids. For example, they have private health care provides, yet a socialized single payer for health care. The U.S. is shifted much further toward capitalism due to privatized health insurance payers. This makes health care far less efficient and inferior.

[Forestluv]

@soos_mite_ah I consider there to be both negatives and positives to capitalism. Toxic capitalism includes things like lobbyists, extreme wealth inequality, the housing crisis, the opioid crisis etc. And during the Covid crisis, billionaires are getting massively wealthier while tens of millions of people lose their jobs and get evicted. Soon there will be millions of homeless people on one side of the street looking at millions of empty apartments and houses on the other side of the street. That is untenable.

Yet are there some benefits of capitalism we could retain in a new system? I like the idea of increased reward based on skills and productivity. Offering increased financial incentive can be a motivating force to help people reach their potential. Yet within limits. I’m cool with millionaires, yet not cool with people hoarding 10s of billions of dollars. It’s too much concentrated wealth and power.

I also like the aspect competition to speed up progress. Imagine there was a contest each year for the best clean energy discovery. There would be a major recognition and monetary prize. They would be internationally recognized and win millions of dollars. I consider that type of thing is healthy Orange.

[Raphael]

1 hour ago, soos_mite_ah said:

Accumulating for the sake of accumulating seems like a waste of time and energy, and unfortunately, a lot of people try to get rich for similar reasons, not to better humanity. I have nothing against millionaires, its when you're at or near a billion that bothers me because there is no way you can be spending that much money for yourself. 

 

1 hour ago, soos_mite_ah said:

Also my other thing is neoliberalism in other countries and how it deals with foreign affairs. Like there are so many violent conflicts that start just for the accumulation of more and more resources. The way cheap labor is used abroad is messed up because it commodifies people into disposable machines instead of seeing them as human beings. And finally, many diseases that are present in developing nations like HIV/AIDs have treatment but people aren't willing to help them because it's "too expensive" and "not on the budget"  when its actually totally doable. The thing that bothers me the most is how profits get prioritized over peoples general well being and human rights. I know that's not everywhere in all cases but it is a large consequence

These are parts of its limitations just like other stages. It's probably difficult to accept it for people at stage green because we are directly confronted with these issues in our era, but it's easier to understand the horrors of the past like dictators and slavery because we are out of touch with that.

They are not doing what they are doing because they consciously want it, but because they are unconscious. Just as a stage red dictator is unconscious of the suffering that it is doing to others.

Billionaires that don't contribute back enough are run by unhealthy emotions and motives but are unconscious of it. It's like an addiction for them, if you ever had a strong addiction you can understand how they feel. They want to feel good and they think that they can feel good by accumulating wealth so they endlessly chase money and success, it's like being addicted to gambling or alcohol, it's super difficult for them to stop, they just cannot help themselves.

Many of them are only rich financially, but poor emotionally, they are ignorant and don't know what life is really about.

You just need to let go and accept it, just as you can accept the existence of past tyrants and of slavery.