Well, no offense, but that's really just you're opinion. Who decides nice? And do you really need a nice truck if you already have a vehicle?
I have had several discussions with OWS type people. They tell me how greedy the top 1% is and how we need to impose massive taxes on companies who outsource so the bottom 99% can get a bigger chunk of the wealth. I always point out that those outsourced jobs go to poor people who don't have running water, gas, electricity, etc., and by their standards, the OWS bunch are extremely greedy for wanting more so they could buy a new iPhone at poor peoples' expense. Those outsourced jobs mean regular meals, electrical grids, gas lines, and sewer systems in 3rd World countries
'Tis all relative, my friend.
No offense in return, but can you read? Why would I say it was an individual moral judgment if I believed that I was expressing an absolute truth that applied to all people in all situations?
'Tis all relative, my friend.
Not really. Moral relativity has no validity at all, notleast because it contradicts itself by making the individual as the moral arbiter an absolute every bit as absolute as "Thou shalt not commit adultery." As far as the poor benefiting from outsourcing goes, that's very true, but it leads to an answer for your question about trucks. If I can buy one used Ford and support five third world kids through Compassion, but the three gold plated trucks will keep me from even dropping a buck in the Salvation Army kettle, then there's good I'm leaving undone just so I can have three gold plated trucks instead of one truck that's painted red or blue.
The difference between conservatives and the OWS types is that they believe that it's society's job to not only keep me from buying the gold plated trucks, but to decide where my charity money goes. The conservative view is not that there is no moral component in spending and acquisition, it's that the morality of it is between the person and their God, not between them and their government.