[StavrosK]

I'm not sure I'll be able to change your mind if it's not evident to you why that is a bad self-image, but here goes:

First, you have to define "bad". It's not bad for the planet, or bad for society as a whole. It's bad for the person who has that belief, because it leads him to act against his self-interest (as a poor person) and making him act for the interest of richer people.

Shouting "Why should the rich pay higher taxes so the poor can get better healthcare?" when you're yourself poor isn't "good" for you, is it?

[Egregore]

Actually may be that poor person thinks one step ahead and don't want rich people to go pay their taxes in another country?

[CamperBob]

First, you have to define "bad". It's not bad for the planet, or bad for society as a whole. It's bad for the person who has that belief, because it leads him to act against his self-interest (as a poor person) and making him act for the interest of richer people.

It depends on how important your principles are to you. One expression of altruism that the left in the US doesn't seem to respect at all is the idea that someone who's poor or unemployed might still believe that it's not healthy for society to grant him all sorts of entitlements.

Put another way, apparently "voting for your own self interest" is a good thing only when the lower and middle classes do it. I find this hypocritical in the extreme.

Shouting "Why should the rich pay higher taxes so the poor can get better healthcare?" when you're yourself poor isn't "good" for you, is it?

I'd like to think that my bank balance doesn't determine my political thinking, with regard to what I believe is the best way to run a society for the long term benefit of all of its members.

I wholeheartedly reject the notion of 'class' when applied to productive adults in the United States. So the rhetoric of rich versus poor means nothing to me, beyond referring to an unreasonable concern that some people seem to have with numbers stored in a bank's database under keys associated with other account holders.

[forensic]

Joe the Plumber meet Bob the Camper?

Trivializing money by referring to it as "just numbers in a bank" is surreal. Those numbers in a bank are the #1 determinant of whether you will do things like: eat, have a roof over your head, or pass on your genes.

It's pretty much impossible to overemphasize the importance of those numbers.

You're pretending that class doesn't exist while you pretend that money doesn't matter. Class is real. And class is important specifically because money does matter. A lot.

[khafra]

When you're truly rich, they're just numbers in a bank. They're a scorecard by which you determine whether you're winning. Poor people want a reliable car and a roof that doesn't leak; rich people want a higher score, but rich people are more effective at getting what they want.

As for Joe the Plumber syndrome, there's a relevant quote from Vladimir Nesov. Something along the lines of "revealed preference is not a very charitable way to interpret people's actions."

[bluedanieru]

>One expression of altruism that the left in the US doesn't seem to respect at all is the idea that someone who's poor or unemployed might still believe that it's not healthy for society to grant him all sorts of entitlements.

So if you're poor and left-wing nobody should take you seriously? What if you're rich and left-wing?

And I don't think a lot of people have a problem with the rich voting in their self-interest. It's when they control the airwaves and purchase the government that people get upset.

(Needless to say, I'm not referring to people in the 250k-500k band here, but rather that 1% that controls half the wealth of the nation.)

[CamperBob]

So if you're poor and left-wing nobody should take you seriously? What if you're rich and left-wing?

You lost me. Can you rephrase that point (or maybe I should)?