> Society should be structured in such a way that charity is not needed.

We are a few more millenia away from that one.

It seems our very nature wires us for an us-vs-them mentality and until we can get past that, those patterns will appear in the social structures we set up; naturally creating a ladder of progression.

The idea is nice but the incentives we have to create new products and wealth unfortunately also incentivizes us to hoard the wealth

Not sure that's true at all. Would need some further argument to be convinced. Essentially, does that mean that all people are fundamentally mean? That's trivially false.

Nah I don't think all people are mean or that we're doomed to failure, I believe we just often focus on short-term interests/gains and can be comically bad at thinking through long term consequences on a global scale (see: pollution, government interference in nation states, surveillance, anti-vax movements, all those who intentionally create and share misinformation, etc.)

I don't think we're fundamentally good/bad/anything. We have just have a set of learned/programmed biases and ways of thinking that can lead us to poor decision and the social programming takes several generations to change globally

> I believe we just often focus on short-term interests/gains ...

This is very narrow US-centric thinking. Just look at the Chinese government, who generally have a longer term view of just economic gain compared to the US. It's not hard to extrapolate from that.

I think the idea that humans are naturally self-centered, short-term thinkers is flawed. One could easily make the argument that humans are social creatures and are long-term thinkers. Short-term profits are incentivized by the current economic, political, financial system in the US. Doesn't have to be some innate human aspect or whatever.

longer term such as, suck as much money and IP out of the US over decades as possible? after letting millions of your own people die through fucked up policy and then reverting it and claimed you 'lifted them out of poverty' ?

>Society should be structured in such a way that charity is not needed.

This is only possible in a world where there is no bottom rung of the ladder. That's impossible.

Why can't we make an effort to raise the height of the bottom rung of the ladder? In the case that we did, wouldn't charity then be unnecessary?

I didn't say it's not possible to raise the height. I said there always will be a bottom rung.

But if the "bottom rung" got to a certain height (i.e. food, shelter, healthcare) wouldn't further charity be unnecessary?