U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-14-2011, 11:57 AM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,777 posts, read 24,127,422 times
Reputation: 12106

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadking2003 View Post
If the playing field is level in terms of opportunity...
Define "opportunity". Does being in a better financial position play any role?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-14-2011, 12:21 PM
 
Location: it depends
6,074 posts, read 5,151,621 times
Reputation: 5767
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Define "opportunity". Does being in a better financial position play any role?
Oh, right, when it comes to money, more is better than less. So let's gather all the money up in one big pile, and then pass out equal shares to everybody. The productive, efficient, effective and hard-working, those who figure out how to meet some need of the rest society, will soon end up with a disproportionate share again. So ultimately, social justice logically comes down to 100% tax rates and everything provided by the government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2011, 12:23 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,777 posts, read 24,127,422 times
Reputation: 12106
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcopolo View Post
Oh, right, when it comes to money, more is better than less. So let's gather all the money up in one big pile, and then pass out equal shares to everybody. The productive, efficient, effective and hard-working, those who figure out how to meet some need of the rest society, will soon end up with a disproportionate share again. So ultimately, social justice logically comes down to 100% tax rates and everything provided by the government.
Thank you for proving my point, that "equal opportunity" is basically a sham. You could have done without screaming in pain, and spilling out what is left of your brain, however.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2011, 01:01 PM
 
Location: it depends
6,074 posts, read 5,151,621 times
Reputation: 5767
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
Thank you for proving my point, that "equal opportunity" is basically a sham. You could have done without screaming in pain, and spilling out what is left of your brain, however.
You're welcome, and thank you for your concern about my brain.

Here are the things that help build wealth that are free: effective attitudes, strong work ethic, healthy habits, desire to learn, commitment to meet the needs of the market (whether the market for one's labor, or for a product or service one might provide).

I didn't need equal opportunity, I needed AN opportunity. Could I start a bank, or car dealership, or retail store, or restaurant? Nope, didn't have the capital. Could I go be a doctor or CPA or lawyer? Not without the required education, which I was unwilling to invest in. The car dealer's son, the fellow that inherited bank stock, the doctor's daughter...THEY had opportunities that were denied to me.

I spent zero time lamenting the opportunities that I did not have, and now I count among my clients bankers and car dealers and store owners and doctors and CPA's and lawyers. I used the wealth-builders that were free to me, and are still free to anyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2011, 01:15 PM
 
1,337 posts, read 1,176,610 times
Reputation: 656
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
...
It may seem you do not quite understand the legal and philisophical concept of equality of opportunity. A not uncommon misunderstanding a lot of people make whereas people think it refers to "opportunity" in the broadest social sense possible, whereas in the legal and philosophy of law context, the term is extremely narrow and refined, and relates to the concept of the abolition of privilege which would legally enjoin any party from pursuing a particular course of action which is taken to be a liberty. The very last words of the previous sentence being the side-constraint which emphasizes peoples oft-misunderstanding of the two terms equality of opportunity and equality of outcome.

There is no room in the narrowly construed legal concept for the broader concept, because the two are often at odds with each other, as the overly broad interpretation which views opportunity in its broadest sense, could literally undermine every single human liberty that has ever existed. Equality of opportunity and equality of outcome are always viewed as a subordinate condition which is constrained only in terms of what are considered wrongful actions within a particular set of ethos.

More to the point, the legal concept of equality of opportunity interprets that subordinate phrase within the context of the preexisting set of ethics which defines liberty (under any given set of ethos), and allows all opportunities, except those that specifically conflict with the certain actions which are prohibited by that set of ethics.

Equality of opportunity is never under any circumstances, in any system of ethics under consideration, ever taken to be the superior concept, because by its very nature, it would undermine and interfere with every liberty that exists as soon as any individual offers up the slightest claim that a particular circumstance disadvantages him. That persons disadvantage would be taken to override all other liberties that humans have, and for that reason, equality of opportunity and equality of outcome are two concepts that are always placed as subordinate to a larger framework of ethics.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2011, 01:44 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,777 posts, read 24,127,422 times
Reputation: 12106
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreedomThroughAnarchism View Post
It may seem you do not quite understand the legal and philisophical concept of equality of opportunity.
I do, and it doesn't exist. Thank you. I'm in far better position than most, but not as good as others. And that is the reality. Equal opportunity would warrant equal challenges, no?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2011, 02:10 PM
 
10,167 posts, read 16,701,730 times
Reputation: 5698
Quote:
Originally Posted by kazoopilot View Post
More stereotypical far-right claptrap. The poor are lazy, blah, blah, blah. I used to think the same thing (when I was a conservative) before I actually met people who were less fortunate. Get out and meet some real poor people--you might change your mind.
I don't believe that was what the poster you responded to was saying. However, this emotive drivel is quite typical of the usual far-left claptrap.

As was posted quite a bit earlier on this thread, do you know who "the poor" actually are? I mean in terms of real live flesh and blood human beings, not some static class of people which it benefits a lot of liberals to make victims of for their own profit and almost intrinsic sense of moral superiority.

The individual poor today are -- 20 years from now -- thanks to capitalism/free-market -- very likely to be in the middle and even upper-classes. These "poor" are usually young people just starting out, or those who, yes, are suffering temporary set-backs. But they won't be there for long.

Now then, on the other hand? If you want to see the result of government in the equastion, then just live in a Section 8 housing complex sometime. Many if not most of these folks are not the victims of unfortunate circumstances, but there by their own life-choices. And, worse, have a sense of entitlement (courtesy of the welfare state and well-meaning liberals) and no incentive at all to improve their own lot in life. That experience will quickly disabuse that idealistic image of the "poor" always being victims.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2011, 02:20 PM
 
8,816 posts, read 5,374,721 times
Reputation: 3694
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Well, if he had half a brain and he worked and saved for 30 years, he would be fine. If, on the other hand, he lived above his means, he would be in trouble.

Hard work is more important than intelligence. I have seen very intelligent people (who were lazy) flunk out of college and or med school, while less intelligent hard working individuals prospered. Mark Twain has noted that great goals can be accomplished by incrementalism- break up your tasks into a series of small tasks and you will be more successful.

Apparently you are very young. When I was young, I was flat broke. However, I did not focus on economics and wealth as my ultimate goal, as apparently you do, and I prospered as a result. Life is more than the pursuit wealth- wealth will come to those who work hard and remain focused.

I would be willing to bet that if you had worked hard, attained a useful degree, and prospered that you would have an entirely different attitude. Socialism is for losers who have failed or have convinced themselves that they can never compete. Thank goodness I have instilled some confidence in my children so that I do not have to hear that whiney stuff in my home. I can guarantee you that I came from a worse econmic background than you, but worked hard instead of whining and complaining about my situation. Man up.
So says the slave master to the slave.

Success is 95 % inspiration ... not perspiration. That "work hard" philosophy is a myth. No one works harder than the ditch digger, and no one will find themselves in a deeper hole, faster.

The fact is, us older folks cannot apply 1950's, 60's and 70's strategies to today's younger folks in today's environment, because "use to" doesn't live here any longer, and it is questionable that it ever actually did. Given the steady increases in the division between the haves and have nots over the past 3 decades, working hard may have made you more valuable to those who reaped greater rewards from your labor than you actually did, but is no longer a guaranteed state of comfortable pasture at the end of your usefulness to the work force, as in days gone by.

Furthermore, once upon a time, a degree was a perceptual advantage, given special consideration. It didn't actually result in a guarantee of higher quality output as it was advertised to be, when compared with practical experience. In fact, the person who worked their way up through the ranks, from the mailroom to the boardroom, or the apprentice working under a master, were far superior workers to the inexperienced degree holder placed into a position of mid level right from the start, who was often as ignorant of what was transpiring below him, as what was being done above him.

Today, there is nothing special from a distinguishing or perceptual factor given the commonality of such degree holding prospects. They are everywhere ... and now, they are competing against each other for fewer and fewer opportunities, many of which have no practical association to the education of the prospect. For a growing number, a college degree means one thing ... debt incurred without a reasonable expectation of return on that investment, and the promise of benefits. The promises offered by higher education has switched from the sales pitch that such provides greater advantages for increasing levels of prosperity over and above those without it ... to the promise that you are literally doomed without it. There is a subtle, but big difference.

Higher education today is purely business ... who's goal is no longer the product outcome of that operation ... but the income benefit to the operation, extracted by the process.

When an alleged free market economy degrades to the level of corruption that currently exists today, "connections" are far more important than education, with strategy and a more liberal interpretation of integrity far more important than work ethic.

In other words, our current dog eat dog, cutthroat economy is more likely to reward ruthlessness and a lack of integrity, than it will recognize hard work and honesty.

And that very unwholesome philosophy is the central tenet being communicated to students attending some of the most prestigious universities today. The work hard for success is the "community college" philosophy, training the next generation of hamburger flippers and cashiers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2011, 02:56 PM
 
7,585 posts, read 4,062,449 times
Reputation: 1188
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
So says the slave master to the slave.

Success is 95 % inspiration ... not perspiration. That "work hard" philosophy is a myth. No one works harder than the ditch digger, and no one will find themselves in a deeper hole, faster.

The fact is, us older folks cannot apply 1950's, 60's and 70's strategies to today's younger folks in today's environment, because "use to" doesn't live here any longer, and it is questionable that it ever actually did. Given the steady increases in the division between the haves and have nots over the past 3 decades, working hard may have made you more valuable to those who reaped greater rewards from your labor than you actually did, but is no longer a guaranteed state of comfortable pasture at the end of your usefulness to the work force, as in days gone by.

Furthermore, once upon a time, a degree was a perceptual advantage, given special consideration. It didn't actually result in a guarantee of higher quality output as it was advertised to be, when compared with practical experience. In fact, the person who worked their way up through the ranks, from the mailroom to the boardroom, or the apprentice working under a master, were far superior workers to the inexperienced degree holder placed into a position of mid level right from the start, who was often as ignorant of what was transpiring below him, as what was being done above him.

Today, there is nothing special from a distinguishing or perceptual factor given the commonality of such degree holding prospects. They are everywhere ... and now, they are competing against each other for fewer and fewer opportunities, many of which have no practical association to the education of the prospect. For a growing number, a college degree means one thing ... debt incurred without a reasonable expectation of return on that investment, and the promise of benefits. The promises offered by higher education has switched from the sales pitch that such provides greater advantages for increasing levels of prosperity over and above those without it ... to the promise that you are literally doomed without it. There is a subtle, but big difference.

Higher education today is purely business ... who's goal is no longer the product outcome of that operation ... but the income benefit to the operation, extracted by the process.

When an alleged free market economy degrades to the level of corruption that currently exists today, "connections" are far more important than education, with strategy and a more liberal interpretation of integrity far more important than work ethic.

In other words, our current dog eat dog, cutthroat economy is more likely to reward ruthlessness and a lack of integrity, than it will recognize hard work and honesty.

And that very unwholesome philosophy is the central tenet being communicated to students attending some of the most prestigious universities today. The work hard for success is the "community college" philosophy, training the next generation of hamburger flippers and cashiers.
The age of the 'new norm' is upon us. Your description of it is dead on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2011, 03:17 PM
 
7,585 posts, read 4,062,449 times
Reputation: 1188
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas View Post
Stop. Take a deeeep breath. Now listen up.

The Great Depression was CAUSED by the actions of the Federal Reserve and the Government ... which is ironic, since the FED was created to prevent such an occurrence.

Rather than go into long details, watch this brief but accurate account of what happened, including the prolonging of the depression by FDR's policies.

Many modern historical economists believe that it was poor decision making and failed monetary policy that caused the Great Depression. In all truthfulness, it was not failed policy ... it was successful policy. The FED hoarded Gold coming in from Europe, refusing to issue corresponding amounts of liquid cash into the US economy, causing an unnecessary yet purposeful contraction of the money supply, resulting in bank failures, business failures, and skyrocketing unemployment. And it was purposeful. Why? Consolidation. A very select few became ULTRA MEGA WEALTHY, including the Gangsters running the Federal Reserve, and their cronies.

FDR exacerbated the problems, and inflicted even more economic misery upon the American people by his 1933 confiscation of gold, under the guise of preventing "hoarding", of all things. Quite a rich irony, since it was the Federal Reserve hoarding of gold that created the depression in the first place.

You won't learn any of this in the public schools. The only way to become accurately educated is to make your own book choices, rather than let someone else tell you which books to read.

Watch .... Learn .... Understand ...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ff1pi...eature=related
It was good of you to post this. It filled in the, 'rest of the history' for me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top