HFWR
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
Just makes it a little sweeter...
((^+^)) SG said:. . . Even with all those advantages, I feel like I had to work at success. I made mistakes that set me back on more than one occasion. If I had had fewer advantages or been saddled with a significant disadvantage in any of the above areas, who knows if I would have been able to accomplish as much. Statistically, we know the answer is that I would not.
. . . Yrs to Go said:Everything said here is true - but I nonetheless fail to see the point. Some people are luckier than others and many of the lucky take their luck for granted. My life would have been different if . . .
. . . Yrs to Go said:The problem with saying that "everything is just a matter of luck" . . .
I didn't see any posts that suggested that.. . . Yrs to Go said:It is simply not possible, nor desirable for a number of practical reasons, to have everyone start out at exactly the same place.
. . . Yrs to Go said:Regardless of the well intentioned efforts of Socialists everywhere, some people will simply be more lucky than others. Those are the breaks. You can set up a society that frees people to make the most out of their individual situation or you can try to impose an "equality" on "everyone". History has taught over and over again that the greatest good to the greatest number is achieved by individuals who are free to pursue their own self interest and reap the rewards of their efforts. Tamper with that formula at your own peril.
((^+^)) SG said:I didn't see any posts that said that.
brewer12345 said:I don't disagree that personal choices affect the outcomes in one's life. Having said that, I believe that the effect of personal choices is massively outweighed by the range of choice a particular individual is confrinted with.
ProfHaroldHill said:But here's the thing -- why does one person have self discipline, and another not? Why does one person learn, and another not? It could be that the answer lies in native ability, or in the circumstances of upbringing, or, of course, in some combination. What else could it be? The point is that both of these are out of our control. Substitute the word "tall" for the concept of success. I believe that a lot of the self-congratulatory attitude of "the successful" is completely inappropriate, as would be a self-congratulatory attitude of the tall.
((^+^)) SG said:I didn't see any posts that suggested that.
Martha said:Statements like "bad choices" "lack of discipline" and "lazy" don't help solve society problems and may even persuade me to become a soldier in the class war. I am worried that we have become a country of winners and losers. And don't feel bad for the losers, it's all their own fault. Paying less taxes and putting more money in the winner's pockets is what our country seems to value. This is not the kind of country I want to live in.
((^+^)) SG said:I guess that is the point. Several earlier posts seemed to be blaming the victim -- claiming their lack of success was only a matter of a lack of self-discipline.
Now it is me that fails to see the point.
. . . Yrs to Go said:You can set up a society that frees people to make the most out of their individual situation or you can try to impose an "equality" on "everyone". History has taught over and over again that the greatest good to the greatest number is achieved by individuals who are free to pursue their own self interest and reap the rewards of their efforts. Tamper with that formula at your own peril.
ProfHaroldHill said:My dogma detector just went off . . .
HH
ProfHaroldHill said:Substitute the word "tall" for the concept of success. I believe that a lot of the self-congratulatory attitude of "the successful" is completely inappropriate, as would be a self-congratulatory attitude of the tall.
Martha said:Yes, life isn't fair and I deal with that on a regular basis. I say let us try to make it more fair. That is what civilization is all about.
. . . Yrs to Go said:dogma: a point of view or tenet put forth as authoritative without adequate grounds (Webster's 9th)
Now which position do you think is more fitting of that description?
1) My position that history has shown capitalism brings the greatest good to the greatest number
Or
2) Your position that one can:
Martha said:Yes, life isn't fair and I deal with that on a regular basis. I say let us try to make it more fair. That is what civilization is all about.
I also do not necessarily buy that our system is the best. We still lag in a number of quality of life factors, and our lifespan does not lead the world. Research is showing class mobility is stagnating and is lagging behind Scandinavia and European countries.
Martha said:
I also do not necessarily buy that our system is the best. We still lag in a number of quality of life factors, and our lifespan does not lead the world. Research is showing class mobility is stagnating and is lagging behind Scandinavia and European countries.
Sorry about the editorial license, Wab, but I wondered how this would read if I replaced one penurious concept with another...wab said:How about this -- contribute to society or go to prison work in a cubicle. In prison the cubicle, you'll get free board, free food, exercise, socialization, and even a library, but you lose your freedom and you have to do something mindless like make license plates. Nobody starves, nobody is homeless, and you have a strong incentive to contribute.
((^+^)) SG said:Yrs to go:
I don't feel like you are discussing the same issues others are raising. Instead, you have consistently misinterpreted what others post, then argue against that misinterpretation. You seem to have missed the points of most of the posts and to be angry about something. Sorry if I contributed to your discomfort.
Nords said:Sorry about the editorial license, Wab, but I wondered how this would read if I replaced one penurious concept with another...
Here is something you will probably not understand, which I will try to explain by way of your example. In the example cited here, the two positions are not mutually exclusive re being dogmatic. Two positions can both be dogmatic -- one being dogmatic does not mean that the other is not. Both views could be dogmatic, or neither, or one and not the other.. . . Yrs to Go said:Now which position do you think is more fitting of that description?
1) My position . . .
Or
2) Your position . . .
wildcat said:Why the hot debate? Oh same ol' I know I'm right and you're wrong attitude
ProfHaroldHill said:Here is something you will probably not understand
Your broad, sweeping, overconfident statement is black and white, and dogmatic.
HH
ProfHaroldHill said:ERs and ER wannabees are geezers by nature (me, too, certainly) whatever their age. Thus, the attitudes . . .
HH
wab said:I think you're onto something here. There can be more than one level of prison. Many of us here recently escaped the broadest level. And, if fact, if you are economically desperate or mentally ill, there's an excellent chance that you'll end up in our traditional prison, so we already have the nobody-starves "utopia" I described.
So, in my new utopia, I propose that we simply add another level of prison. Voluntary confinement + government work program (a la Roosevelt's WPA). What do you think? Anybody want to nominate me for a Nobel?
. . . Yrs to Go said:"History has taught over and over again that the greatest good to the greatest number is achieved by individuals who are free to pursue their own self interest and reap the rewards of their efforts."
Martha said:I am not sure this is the case. I am not even sure we have a sample of a society where individuals were allowed to pursue their own self interest without restriction. Instead, because we are a society, various restrictions are put into place. Can't murder people for their stuff. Can't have slaves. Must pay a minimum wage. Etc.
I think it is reasonable and good for society to have safety nets. As the Professor said, the choice doesn't have to be back or white.