Topic: A tale of the two parasites (Read 382 times)

For sure having intense and selfish desires for wealth has been causing a lot of people to do things that are really unimaginable. This is really bad because most of all those rich people are in control in government, that's why most countries these days hardly move forward economically.

It is because of all these parasites that are always taking from the country and not giving back, and always doing things that are only going to satisfy their selfish needs. Well, there’s not going to be a world without these people, so they are always going to be around. But we should always do our best to get rid of them whenever possible.

No much point of argument via justifying the Rich, because from my perception, the richest add value to the society and also add values to the poor category of people, the only thing we should emphasize on, is the characteristics of them accordingly, but we are not meant to generalized all richest that their character towards contributing to benefit of the country or another is questionable or abnormal, it depends, the category set of rich caliber's that depends in political finance and those groups can't add value to the country, because what comes to their minds is idealogy of embezzlement of funds.

So my observations, the parasite rich category is very harmful to the people than the parasite set of the poor category, because it's very obvious and quiet understandable that the poor does not cause a commotion to a domain or to the country rather they embrace peace and also make the life of mankind especially those who fall into category of rich to live easier live by rendering service to them through skill, trade and so numerous to be mention.

Some of the rich parasites add value to the country directly and indirectly, i can equally say that they render value through setting up infrastructure's and hire different participants to engage in the function in order to reduce the level of crime to the society, while some of them embrace the methods of embezzlement and get out away with it in order to put people in pain, that's the reason i said we have positive parasite and negative parasite, just that their characters define them individually.

rich parasites will become very terrible wolves, it can happen that they are desperate to buy government regulations to carry out their actions so that their greed appears, and finally oppress the poor parasites. After the small parasites are suppressed, they do whatever it takes to fulfill their needs, and not infrequently the criminal path is taken

compared to calling it abnormal I prefer to call it natural selection and a fact that must be accepted.
because indeed when we start to be born and start to live the longer the competition becomes more obvious by being distinguished by the words the rich and the poor.
and this will not be able to change as long as the person who runs it is the one who can change this.
regardless of anything natural selection has existed since we were born and like it or not we have to follow the rules that already exist today even though these are not clearly written rules.
This competition and classification of people is what makes this happen, so it will be very difficult to change the situation, especially for those who are labeled as poor.
they have to work extra to change their circumstances to be better in life, they must be required to survive in all forms of life's challenges

This two class of parasites are very dangerous to society, it's growth and development, it's security level because they do more harm than good since they don't exactly contribute positively to the growth of the society,
I think the rich parasites are the most annoying thinking everything are above the laws, always looking for a way to manipulate the system to bend to their demands, the poor parasites are almost like a toothless bulldog, can't do much because of their poor financial status.

I think it is not abnormal but the reality and outcome of life. The rich get richer and the poor is made poorer syndrome is because of the access to power and economic resources. Example the rich person is likely to have rich friends whom he can get loan from to execute a business idea that will further enrich him or he is connected in government but the poor is likely not going to see his or her dream through or may "die" with the idea. If you have read Animal Farm by George Orwell, you can understand more why some human beings can always be there either because of family tree and history. Also , Rich Dad Poor Dad by Robert kiyosaki will teach some of the reasons more. Only a few hand full of the poor may find their way up the rope of wealth and richest especially with the cryptocurrency innovation where just hodling a few btc is worth a fortune.


No they are not the only but the rich is connected and either someone in the government or friend to friends in high places that can get them off the hook faster than you know or before it gets to public eyes. Files, calls and bribes are taken for it not to be below out to public. Common... They drink over such in round table. Such an unfair situation.


Stealing is in the genealogy, can be adopted from others like friends. The stealing is not exclusive to the poor because the rich steal with the pen. Therefore, it is just the mode of stealing that may be different.

That's very abnormal. The rich get richer, the poor go to prison. Poor people often commit crimes, Rich people will be more famous.

Poor people are more often victims of crime because there are no security facilities. They will suffer more and more because of the greed of the rich who want to increase their wealth. Rich people can do whatever they want because they can afford everything including security and power.

Poor people turn into parasites (harming others) because of the difficult demands of life, They steal to survive. The poor steal because they can't hold their hunger, while the rich steal by oppressing the poor because they want to increase their wealth.

That's not the root of the problem. Why do there exist poor people? Because this is the society we create. Some people don't have access on education, some people have mental problems that are ignored and sometimes it's stigma to go and visit psychiatrist, some people have stupid parents who born and born new babies while starving. The root of all of these is the lack of education and it may sound rough but the easy acceptance of asylum seekers. The Europe is very liberal, gives Asylum to those who can't bring any benefit to the country and to whose who are really poor parasites but those who can trul bring success and benefit to the country, find it very hard to get the citizens of Europe (You have to come with funds that will be enough to keep you alive in Europe: money for rent and food, then you have to pay some tution fees, but that's really cheap in Norway/Germany, you have to study for 4 years, then you are given some time to find a job with your profession and after that you can apply for Permanent Residence and then comes the citizenship which is still hard to get for these people while Asylum Seeker from poor and full of war countries, who have no manners, no knowledge and are pure criminals, are easily given citizenship.

It is something the same with the parisite movie which the wealthy one is helping thos people in need by providing them jobs but instead they got greedy which they recommend their whole family in his job without knowing by their boss. The idea was really good but it makes you greedy in money and also wealth that could make people devilish

when we talk about this, we are actually aware of it or not, we are still living with a system that uses natural laws where indeed everyone uses all kinds of ways to make them prosperous regardless of other people.
and indeed parasites like this will never disappear forever because it is in accordance with the law of the jungle that I said, because indeed they are the perpetrators who do things like they think when they don't do what they are doing now they will lose everything they have.
because their principle still holds that whoever is strong will survive in life.
and indeed things like this we will not be able to finish when we still cannot be free from what is called greed and avarice.

It would be unwise to say that all poor people are parasites, because as you said anyone can be a parasite including the rich. Sometimes I see some
poor people trying to do everything they can to provide for themselves and their families. Even though the business or work that poor people do
makes very little money, it is important that they do it the right way. So if we see many poor people who beg on the street hoping for help from others,
we must remember that not all poor people do that. I am indeed more annoyed with people who already have large incomes, but because of their
greed they commit corruption, it is a real parasite.

This is part of my point that some rich people also do make value to the poor when they have provided them with jobs either directly or through the contacts that they have with their friends Value is created even when you provide food or shelter only because by that time you have provided immediate needs for the poor and the household. Food, shelter are part of value , it gives life and only the living can acquire other values that are futuristic.

what you say is true, poor people are not parasites and anyone can become a parasite. Those who only take advantage for themselves without benefiting others are parasites or parasites that must be exterminated.
in the business of such parasitic traits will make others uncomfortable and only burdened with no significant profit.
government is also a big parasite that lives on everyone including the poor and rich and those who are proven to be corrupt are the type of parasites that are no longer good.

Not all the poor are parasites as well as the rich. Very often poor people are poor because they just do not have opportunity to find another but some low paid work. There are also a lot of good people among the rich, who have their huge businesses and give a lot of money on charity, on increased scholarships for promising children, etc. I'm not a racist, but in fact real parasites are all those afro-economical-migrants that secretly sneak into The European Union, do nothing, do not want to work at all but live off financial benefits from government.

I might say that the government officials/politicians might have something to do with these two types of people because of their corrupted leading management. But if you read the definition of these two, they aren't really giving something back to the economy in which they were likely a parasites that enjoying what they could get to the society but never bother to give back in return to the society.

And that's a toxic kind of traits for someone to develop, I despise those kind of people they were the most dirtiest people you would not want to work with.

Of course the government is the biggest issue here, because they are the common element between rich and poor parasites. There are only parasites from both species because there is a corrupt government behind feeding them with the taxes paid by another citizens.

The analogy works perfectly if you highlight the government's participation on the scheme, but it's inaccurate to label riches as parasites just because they don't want to pay taxes to feed the real parasites (the government and the ones patronized by them, being them rich or poor).

This is the reason why the divide between the poor and the rich blurs even more today than in the past, and not for the better. The ones most affected are the people who are not rich but are not poor either, those who are able to live stable, well-off lives. They are left to of course care for the sentiments of the poor but at the same time under the rich parasite's tyrannical hold. What can we do about it? provide help and information when needed, and stop nourishing the leeches of the society basically. This is what I am saying. The economic divide between the rich and the poor is becoming more and more unrecognizable, which is good if not for the fact that it's the middle class that's becoming more poor and the rich are able to enjoy the luxury of life. The stagnation in economic growth, couple that with the ever-existing graft and corruption from each government, makes living very hard for the poor and the middle class while so advantageous for the elite.

Wealthy people always live in a prosperous way in society they are not parasites the poor live like parasites like the rich do not improve their normal life journey the biggest victims are the poor people many of whom ‘eat day by day. This stagnation has also had a major negative impact on people whose incomes are slightly above the poverty line but because the economic base is fragile these people are helpless, they can be catastrophic in any disaster or economic crisis.

Even if we don't like to call them parasites, there will be people calling them that way or have another term that has the same meaning. Those people that are born with a golden spoon, don't have to think about struggles because they're all set until they grow old with their inheritance from their rich parents. While for those people that are unfortunately born in a poor family, it's not their problem if they've been born in that family and as the known saying about dying poor, it's their fault if they end up being in that status.

I don't like calling anyone parasite. It is based on the simple definition that everyone must contribute to someone else in society, otherwise he is a parasite. That is a communist way of thinking.

Many people born in rich family, they have plenty of resource that can support them for generations, they don't need to contribute to society, and it is a blessing if they don't start a war against another country just because their benefits are hurt

Many people born in poor family, they have no chance to get a good education or job to support themselves, they end up receiving social benefits, it is a blessing if they don't go on street and rob other people

There's always the other side of the story for each of those parasites. There are poor people but they're not parasites that are opposites to the description that you've given.
There are also rich people who are not parasites and they're living normally and want to contribute and opposites the description that you've given.
The sad truth is that there really are people that don't want to contribute to the economy and going up of a country. They're as is what it is with their living.

It is a term that can hardly be attacked in parallel with the simile that it intends to refer to, with parasites any simple treatment can end them ...

It is a question that regardless of the social class is moral, cultural, it seems there is no remedy in certain individuals, fortunately it is not the collective as a rule to be parasites, that is, I firmly believe that regardless of the social classification, if they are poor or rich, people hate, they refuse to fall into that status.

However, it is a reality of the influence of the environment in which this group of people subsist, except individual incurable parasites, I believe that the more protectionism there is on the part of those in charge of reducing this type of behavior (governments)  it cannot be fought, it requires creating strict social plans, egalitarian laws, etc.

So from that point of view we could "save" the parasitic group that is the one that really harms and is the one that can be cured, the rest that remain (individuals) die being poor or rich parasites.

Excellent Analogies I have to say. Especially the Rich Parasite thing is essentially what is more dangerous, it's because these type of people are using the resources of the country to generate their persona wealth but are not adding to the country or state they live in. Talking about poor parasites I can only think of extreme socialists who just want the state to do everything for them and they could just rest for whole their lives, 2nd category of people are eventually coming down because in today's world there is no free lunch but the first type of people are definitely increasing each day.

Anyone can be a parasite be rich or poor. I still think the rich could be a worse drain if they become parasitic because of the sheer amount of money they can siphon if they've become "too big too fail". Anyone remember those millionaires coming in on their private jets to ask for bailouts? It's ridiculous and disgusting.


And they don't even need to be corrupt to do damage! Governments in general, tend to be inefficient at using money since after all, it's not their money and there's always more they can take from. I believe in some places there are even rules where certain departments would have to use up the fund allocated to them so they end up using it for things that don't really add value.

The middle class is the one that is getting screwed and these days we are seeing that middle class is getting closer to poor class more and more. However in a world where someone literally used government pay out to go to space for fun is not the time to say poor class is doing something wrong. If we have people who are leeching welfare and basically just getting help from the government without putting anything into the world, it could be mainly because the government doesn't support them at all as well.

The fact is that if I end up studying, graduate college, get a good grade, become an engineer, and earn a 100k-120k in USA right now, I would live a life a mechanic would earn and I wouldn't have to be an engineer that studied so much for that, I could basically get night school and intern at a mechanic and become something like that and make that kind of money. This is why I understand poor class because if I am not going to be rich, then I rather be not be middle class as well and that's their thought.

I second that, and actually I believe it's not mandatory that a rich person touches the lives of others in society, don't get me wrong, morally it's right that if you're so wealthy you should impact the lives of others as it would cost you little or nothing, but not doing so doesn't make you a horrible person, at least that's how I see it, except such Individual is part of the government as I feel it's the duty of the government to try its possible best to make sure it's citizens lead a very good and comfortable life.

I also believe that being poor doesn't automatically translate into the ideology that the person is lazy, I absolutely agree with you on that, there are quite a lot of other factors that can play a part in a person being poor, and mind you that there are hard-working people that aren't rich, there's just no straightforward way to decide these sort of things.

I agree with you on this . both are parasitic , the rich are worse off because they know they can contribute enough to help , instead they make it worse than by creating social unrest. If you want to get rid of the parasite of wealth, you should first nullify private ownership of property/land, as every land owner has can earn rent and live forever on passive rent income but all of them are people with high status in society.

It's become the norm to pit the rich against the poor, and create extreme animosity. The political revolutionists just want to get anyone they can on board to push whatever political agenda they can. Whatever display of moral virtue they may choose, those demonizing the rich with extreme vitriol do so out of their own self interest, which has profound irony within itself.

There are very wealthy people that exist who are horrible people, but owning wealth does not make you inherently evil or parasitic, and on the same note, being poor does not mean you are lazy either.

The two parasites works hand-in-hand and are the problems that we have in the society. The poor parasites you have described here are the same ones that collect pennies from the rich parasites and are then used to carry out whatever foolish plans than the rich have, and thereby creating social unrest most of the times.

Seriously I don’t like these kind of people, they are the worst you will ever have in a community, they are a problem anywhere they are and they don’t want the society to rest for some reasons that are best known to them, they usually form groups that terrorize the society, because they benefit from such evil acts.

Yes I really would think that paying some one else that is creating a job is adding value from the angle I'm coming from, by not generalizing. Some rich people may have given jobs to subordinate illicitly or for illegal purposes and for selfish purpose but at the point the money is paid it helps the next man to sustain and better their lives. I wonder how OP can push that away as not value   Wages and salary are part of value at least considered as immediate value. Example Elon musk is creating value by pumping dogecoin and hodlers are making profit from that and that is immediate value but whatever is done with the proceed of the doge pump IMO may be the after effect but initial value has been created which is an opportunity of itself.

And of the two, the worse one are the rich people, for they have the capacity to help and to make something happen by doing even just the bare minimum like paying taxes and whatnot yet still evades doing so. Whereas the poor people don't much choice or options for themselves, and even so that does not make them any better than the rich guys. These two parasites really eat up the society bit by bit, and start lots of unnecessary things in order to justify their needs, and why they should be favored over other people.

This is why we can never achieve utopia. A small group of people will always find fault in everyone else and always look to trick the honest guys into doing their dirty work for them.

You are questioning the need for a government on the grounds of being unnecessary to build roads and having people working on it that do not add value.

I agree that governments tend to be inefficient, not necessarily run by parasites (no more than in other places anyway), as they do some work, even if you consider it does not add value for you individually.

Road can be privately financed. The problem is that is an approach that tends to widen the wealth gap between different parts of a nation or territory and generates social tension. There is case for private road and a case for public works.

There is one more even bigger parasite and that is government with all their politicians, and this parasites lives from everyone else including rich and poor parasites.
This corrupt lazy parasite is damaging economy even more with crazy rules and regulations, and it is destroying people with inflation, constant rising of taxes, and reducing freedom of people.
And please don't tell me that we can't built roads or live without government, because I am sure that we can.

Unfortunately this two class of parasites are amongst us and always looking for ways to create social, political and religious unrest amongst people in the society just to satisfy their selfish ego, and the most annoying part of it is there is nothing anyone can do to remove them from the society, so we can only learn to leave with them.

I couldn't agree more with OP. The problem is the culture and the adults that should be guiding aren't doing their jobs. Doesn't matter if it isn't perfect, abut at least there should be efforts! And another problem are those who do not have adults to guide them. They make the world their enemies and refuse to change for the better because of hate and self pity. But even so, there are others who rise above difficulties and choose to be a better person.

About the rich, they also make me sick. But at least in a way, they contribute a little to the country even when it is involuntary. But other than that, I don't see any other good thing these two types of people that op has mentioned.

Always think that education and people are realized for the rights and knowledge of how to deal with the spirit of law makes those parasites die, the fatten does not live only in a dirty environment or a lot of defects can through to live.
In the upscale systems be the choice of power is making the other party power, the rich realized it and their strength in their wealth so they will try to protect them, no matter how it is because they are like the homeland, because they are caused by their strength.
The poor are also sometimes government employees and other celebrities have little privileges and will die to preserve them.

Both the rich and poor parasites are parasites because somebody allows them to be parasites.
By "somebody" I mean the government and the society.
The government and the society tolerates tax evasion conducted by the rich people and the poor people being spoonfed by the state.If the government and/or society forces the rich and poor people and stop being parasites,then most of them will stop being parasites and start contributing to the society.
Maybe some rich people will just leave the country and go live somewhere else,we can't do anything about it.
Some of the poor people will keep doing crimes,but they will have to face the consequences(going to jail).

The term parasite describe some rich and some poor. Not all of them certainly, as said before in response to another poster.

It is curios how most people do not consider the rich a parasite, because he pays for his (her bills). However, this is not about how much you own, but about how much are you delivering to the society and to others. If the answer is "just taking", the wealth you own is irrelevant.

True, but it's not so much the percentage of people that is important, as the percentage of wealth. I'm also not sure of the wording, but one rich "parasite" has a vastly greater effect than one poor "parasite". And yet it is the poor who are routinely demonised. Someone cheating their way out of a $100 gas bill is less of an issue for society than someone using accounting loopholes to evade a $1,000,000 tax bill.


Certainly. The fact that the very richest obtain most of their wealth not through income but through returns on existing capital is one of the main arguments in favour of a wealth tax (however impractical that may be to implement).

Interestingly, lots of the things I depend on today are from the poor. I think I could survive with them alone if I have no other means to survive, but I doubt the rich can sustain me if I live with them only. To be honest, I can't live in a society without the poor but I can live in a society without the rich. Doesn't mean I don't like the rich but I doubt they can sustain themselves alone without the poor. .

The problem is simply those who are not fruitful whether poor or rich.

According to Merriam-Webster, the parasite is


The second one is probably the applicable one here. It's like they are bringing down the whole economy and think that they deserve it. I agree with your view that it's the people and I wouldn't want to be with them as well. I don't think I can understand why they choose to live like that and only think of themselves. You could also characterize it as selfish and will only do something if it benefits; hence "parasite" is the proper term.

There are many other possible descriptions for different types of people, but I guess that can be a topic for the OP for another time.

I am very fortunate to have lived in a first world country and to have had the opportunity to work in 3rd world countries. So, I have experience of both of these so-called, "Parasites"

Now, do not assume that all people in 1st world countries are "rich parasites" and all people from 3rd world countries are "Poor parasites" ...because that will simply be wrong.

There are a lot of rich people that are investing in 3rd world countries to help the poor... but some of the rich parasites do this to "rape" their resources to profit. Also, some people in 3rd world countries want to work.. but the corrupt politicians steal all the money, that was supposed to go towards projects that would have created new job opportunities. 

Thats too harsh. We dont have any conclusive proof for everyone. There are bold rich peeps who keep giving to society's welfare and yet we are arguing on the rich peeps and their poor giveaways.

Only few of them like Ratan Tata, Ambani, Steve, Elon, Bill & Gates, Adar Poonawalla (Serum India) are constantly giving out money, food, medicinal supplies, shelter and every daily needs. They alone constitute to more than trillions of dollars giving away every year to the needy.

In the recent estimates Tata group alone give away their 66% wealth to the needy through various trusts.

I don't understand why are making the comparison of them with the parasites?

They earn it, they dont steal it. On top of that they are giving away huge part of them.

There are many wealthy peeps who are greedy and dont give away, it does not mean all the riches should be stamped as parasite. That's very poor economical ethics you are imploding on.

I mean tomorrow I might be running a business and funding some charities, so it would be hurtful to see myself getting called rich parasite. That suck.

The rich is paying some one else, that is creating a job. How can you say that isn't creating something?

Unless you are advocating for a social welfare state, how else do you expect creation of economic activity? Private market has all the capital, and so the rich are only as parasitic to the extent the average working person allows them to be beholden to their grip. In any socialist society, where there is no "rich," there is no economic activity, and the end of the tale usually entails a lot of suffering. Private market full of rich people includes a market of workers that are free to take their labor where they want.

Though, the far reaching plutocratic societies truly have parasitic rich people. And by plutocratic, I do not mean extreme capitalism, there is a nuanced difference.

Wouldn't it be much more sensible to blame the current system? Though tbf it is still people who adopt the system to be used so I guess what you stay could still make sense. Still, I'd reckon that it's the way of living that has made people coexist like parasites. In that sense, the concept of the world being a dog-eat-dog one would make complete sense. The poor parasites' situation would make complete sense since they're trying to live, but the rich ones may seem like they are protecting their wealth but in the end, isn't that also one way of trying to live? Though I guess that is a subjective question so I doubt wit could be explained in that way.

This is interest and worth debating. Value depends on supply and demand, as long as people want money, it has value. So by giving other people money in exchange for their product, you are doing fair trading and satisfy other's need of money, how is that not creating anything for anyone?

The real question might be: Why people need money? Does money has value? And where is that value coming from?

By the way, if you want to eliminate rich parasites, then you should first disable private ownership of properties/land, since every land owner is able to do rent seeking and live forever on passive rent income. But if you remove the private ownership of properties, then you have communism society, no rich parasite for sure but lots of politic parasites

And another question, does it really matter economy being strong or weak, as long as most basic needs can be satisfied and national defense is strong enough, like Russia?

I agree. There are indeed such kinds of people in society. But I think they are not totally parasites in the sense that they are still paying taxes in their own limited ways. I mean, who could avoid paying taxes when every time you buy something you are already paying taxes? As a matter of fact, the act of buying itself adds to the economy already.

Well, in the case of the poor parasite, if he/she is eating food, wearing clothes, living in a shelter, and so on all for free, perhaps he/she is a complete parasite. But if she/he's got cash sometimes and uses it to buy stuff, he/she is not an absolute parasite.

That may be true (and I believe it is, though I don't think I'd use the term "parasite" to describe wealthy individuals), but your examples represent two extremes which probably make up just a small percentage of all the citizens of, let's say, the United States.  I don't know what the situation is in other countries; the percentage of both classes of parasites could be higher or lower depending on the state of the economy.  The majority of people are middle-class folks working jobs, with families, and they neither rely on the government to take care of them, nor go to great lengths to hide their wealth from the tax man.

If I had to pick my least favorite category, it would be the rich "parasites" but only because there's a tinge of envy in me that I'm loathe to admit.  The reason I don't think they're true parasites to society is that they do pay a lot of taxes, even if they find loopholes in tax law or even hide money in off-shore accounts or whatever.  Also, the uber-wealthy contribute to the economy through their spending, which directly and indirectly helps everyone else

Oh, by the way, the political system is absolutely corrupt to the core.  It always has been, probably always will be. 

They are both parasites though, the rich are the worse because they know they can contribute enough to help, they instead make it worse by creating social unrest. We've seen a lot of these people in my country who do have a position in the government but also own big businesses like TV and radio station spreading lies. And the poor who believes in them become the poor parasites.

For me this is not a black and white issue.

I think that the rich and poor people that we could call parasites are a minority. In the case of rich people, I would say that there are more parasites among those who have inherited wealth, rather than among those who create it. It is not uncommon to see families where the grandfather was rich, the father maintained a certain standard of living but ate up the wealth, and the grandson ended up squandering what was left.

In the case of poor people, I would say that the number of what we could call parasites, and I don't really like the word, also depends on the incentive system they have. If you live in a country where the ruling politicians consider the poor as victims of society who cannot fend for themselves and that the state has to save (getting their vote in return), there are going to be more parasites than in another country where there is less aid and it is considered that if you do badly economically in life it is at least largely your fault.

Agree or not, that's actually what we see today. It's said to be a parasite or something, maybe the two will not be the same as mixed in one container. If we do not carefully read the text it will be a little wrong. It needs to be repeated to find something that can really be concluded. I don't dare to say both are damaging to the economy. Because it's all in the economic policy of a country. Will it support the rich or will it push the poor to continue paying taxes.

Really, the rich parasite only creates for himself, he will never do anything to anyone that does not bring him any advantage. I feel very sorry for these people and the way of life they live, it must be surrounded by illusions and lies, because in the end we all go to the same place.

"Conditions of degeneration in the organic world are approximately known. These conditions are often of two distinct kinds, deprivation of food, light, etc. so leading to imperfect nutrition and enervation; the other, a life of repose, with abundant supply of food and decreased exposure to the dangers of the environment. It is noteworthy that while the former only depresses, or at most distinguishes the specific type, the latter, through the disuse of the nervous and other structures etc. which such a simplification of life involves, brings about that far more insidious and through degeneration seen in the life history of myriads of parasites."

-Patrick Geddes

---

Always loved this quotation as an outline for defining societal trends.

There are many examples in biology and nature to support this. Domesticated pigs develop differently from wild feral pigs. The degree to which the environment, threats and perceived dangers can affect human development could easily be under recognized. As could negative developmental trends associated with a perceived lack of danger / threat.

To some degree this could be defined by storytelling within a "whatever doesn't kill you, makes you stronger" paradigm. Bruce Wayne being exposed to trauma at a young age may be partially credited with him developing into Batman. The world is always changing and people are changing with it in an effort to adapt to shifting circumstances.

If there's anything that defines a parasitic existence, it could be remaining static and unchanging under a guise of there being no threat or danger to necessitate change.

No, the "rich" parasite does not add any value by paying others. He is not creating anything for anyone. You do not understand the difference between money and value.

Please, read a bit more carefully and see if I say that all poor are parasites in any part of my post.

About the rich, they do add value sort off during their investment in the country that adds to the GDP and increase per income to their employees. The employees are made responsible to their families as they paid and they take care of their children, send them to school, feed and provide shelter.

The rich also add value because of different types of taxes levied against them and their businesses. The monies being generated from that are used to provide social amenities to the people.

Likewise not all the poor are parasites. Some poor have good knowledge to be better but may lack capital to do something with their knowledge. The poor are employed in government and they develop good policy to the government, they are very dedicated to work for progress to the area of life they find themselves.

In politics and economics, I can live with many things, but there is two types of people that I just cannot stand:

The poor parasite

The poor parasite intends to live without adding any value to the economy and society in which he (or she) lives. He will look and learn about all the possible ways to trick others into paying his bills, caring for his children and providing. If that does not happen, he will create social unrest, commit crimes or be a problem for the rest.

Due to this people, many think that poorer people should be left to their own means and that any opportunity you give them is money wasted.


The rich parasite

The rich parasite intends to live without adding any value to the economy and society in which he (or she lives). He will look and learn about all the possible ways to avoid contributing to the country or state he lives in, while demanding full legal protection of his assets and lifestyle. If that does not happen, they will create social unrest, take funds to tax havens a pay politicians to make his will.

Due to this people, many think that rich people should be taxed to death and that the political systems is essentially corrupt.

Both are parasites, both damage the economy.