 
     |
| Panera Tried Socialism, It Failed (Page 4/16) |
|
williegoat
|
FEB 19, 04:57 PM
|
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
FEB 19, 04:58 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Threedog:
Except this idea that social disadvantages are deserved is a complete and utter myth. Social mobility in this country does not exist in the way you discuss it. Right now, it is simply not possible for the majority of people to make more money than their parents in this country.
social ladder, ...social mobility... taxes ...social welfare programs ...
|
|
Equality of outcome shouldn't be strived for.
You cannot make it happen. You should not make it happen.
a useful snippet of an article helps explain my point:
"So what did Jefferson mean when he wrote that, “all men are created equal?” The answer is found in the proceeding phrase, “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” This is how all persons are created equal, because God created us and gave us intrinsic value that we speak of in terms of ‘rights’ language.
Equality of opportunity more simply describes some of our rights and how we are all equal before the law. This type of equality is not inconsistent with liberty, but “an essential component of liberty.” Friedman notes that if someone is denied a job they are qualified for based on their ethnic background, color or religion, then they are being denied equal opportunity.
Equality of outcome is the problematic view. This is the idea that everybody should literally be equal. There are many problems with this idea.
First of all, ‘fairness’ is not an objective concept when dealing with wealth. One man’s garbage is another man’s treasure. Second, the passion behind this idea is that it isn’t fair for some kids to have advantages over others just because of the socioeconomic status of their parents. The focus against those who are advantaged is based on one’s property such as home or business values. However, property can also take the form of talents: musical ability, strength and intelligence. From an ethical standpoint, is there really any difference between the two? Many people resent the inheritance of property like houses and businesses, but don’t resent the inheritance of talents. I wish I could play basketball as well as Kobe Bryant. I’d be a multi-millionaire if I had that type of talent.
But let’s consider where this leads. If we were to really try and equal the outcomes, then less advantaged kids would be given the greatest amount of training and the advantaged kids would be given the least amount of training. That’s fair, right? Not for the advantaged kids. The fact is, life is not fair. It is important to realize how we benefit from things being unfair. I take great pleasure in watching the best of the best play against the best of the best. That’s why we pay money to go to sporting events or watch movies with the best actors."
What do you think?[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 02-19-2019).]
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
FEB 19, 05:03 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Jake_Dragon:
You are being indoctrinated into a society that will take everything away from you.
. |
|
Sadder than that, all our kids are being indoctrinated into the same.[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 02-19-2019).]
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
FEB 19, 05:10 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by 2.5:
Sadder than that, all our kids are being indoctrinated into the same.
|
|
That is what worries me most about threedog and those like him. He is responsible for some of those impressionable young minds.
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
FEB 19, 05:13 PM
|
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
FEB 19, 05:28 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Jake_Dragon
|
FEB 19, 05:51 PM
|
|
Its fueling a fire that will burn both side equally as much but in the end it wont be Socialism that rebuilds.
When it gets to the point you have nothing left you want to give up you will be all for having walls.
|
|
|
|
williegoat
|
FEB 19, 06:19 PM
|
|
I found this somewhat amusing: (from an article posted by threedog)
https://www.economist.com/g...ity-in-their-country
| quote | | Politically left-leaning respondents are naturally more doubtful about the scale of social mobility, and are more likely to support redistributive government policies, than conservative ones. But Mr Alesina and his colleagues also find that people of different political stripes also respond differently to new information. When given pessimistic information about social mobility, left-wing respondents became even more likely to support economic redistribution. In contrast, right-wing respondents’ support for redistribution did not change. Perhaps, the authors suggest, right-leaning respondents see government as “the cause of the problem, not the solution”. |
|
|
|
|
|
olejoedad
|
FEB 19, 07:03 PM
|
|
"Perhaps, the authors suggest, right-leaning respondents see government as “the cause of the problem, not the solution”." - quoted from above.
Ronald Reagan was cognizant of that fact decades ago.
|
|
|
|
blackrams
|
FEB 19, 07:07 PM
|
|
Threedog,
Please enlighten those of us who have not seen the light on just how your economic plan would work so that everybody would be happy. The very concept leads me to believe there would be no unemployed, no low wage jobs for unskilled workers, free education, free wifi nationwide, free medical care, a TV in every living room and a chicken in every pot, almost Utopia.
Please enlighten us on how you're gonna pull this off and not reduce this country to Third World status.
Leftist, Progressives/Socialist always have grand ideas how those who have earned less can bennefit by taking from those who have earned more.
Go ahead, I am interested in how you're going to do this.
Please don't tell me you want to follow the path some other country did that has very little in common with how our economy is set up and runs. Or do you purpose to blow it all up and start over.
Rams[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 02-20-2019).]
|
|
|
|