Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Exit Mundi Forums. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Things not looking too good for Iranian president
Topic Started: Jan 18 2007, 05:31 AM (3,699 Views)
piercehawkeye45
Member Avatar
Franklin Pierce
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
The person born into a wealthy family deserves the wealth because the parents, who own the property, get to decide what they want to do with it.

But if it restricts someone else from catching up, then we have the problem. It isn't so much that I have a problem that you can inherent wealth and power, just that places can not be switched. For example, if you are born into a rich and powerful family, you will most likely end up in a position of power when you don't have to earn it while someone born into a poor family will never get that chance to be in a position of power. Just give everyone an equal chance to succeed and I will be satisfied.


Even though we aren't in a caste system, it is set up to keep you in the same class unless you really try to go up or down.

Quote:
 
They have equality under the law and yes you are saying that they should live off my paycheck.

I said good life. If you can't support yourself, you should be kept alive and have a chance to get up on your feet, nothing more.

Quote:
 
No, because I'm not paternalistic and arrogent enough to attempt to use government force to live someone else's life for them.

How am I forcing them to live a certain way? I am just giving them education so they are less likely to make a mistake. If they do make a mistake then, it is their fault.

Quote:
 
Or are you talking about something obscure like increased crime or something? Sorry, there is no link between crime and poverty.

No, I am not talking about that.

Quote:
 
Not when the government is denied the power to begin with. That's what I want to do; deny government the power to transfer money from one person to a person of some favored class.

I just want to take away the natural advantage of being born into a rich family. I don't think everyone should be paid the same, just that you should earn what you get.
Dropped the atomic bomb let them know that it's real
Speak soft with a big stick do what I say or be killed
I'm America!

I have found the enemy and he is us.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Falcon
Member Avatar
Apocalyptic Usher
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Quote:
 
The person born into a wealthy family deserves the wealth because the parents, who own the property, get to decide what they want to do with it.

But if it restricts someone else from catching up, then we have the problem. It isn't so much that I have a problem that you can inherent wealth and power, just that places can not be switched. For example, if you are born into a rich and powerful family, you will most likely end up in a position of power when you don't have to earn it while someone born into a poor family will never get that chance to be in a position of power. Just give everyone an equal chance to succeed and I will be satisfied.


You want to take people's property and bestow it on those who have neither earned it nor deserve it, but you hide this fact in terms like "equal chance."

You can't give everyone an equal chance to succeed in absolute terms because people are not equal, some are better than others, nor is it just or fair to try because you inevitably infringe on people's liberty. Also, it isn't correct to assume that people born rich stay rich and people born poor stay poor. Poor people can work their way up via merit and rich people can slide down via ineptitude.

Quote:
 

Even though we aren't in a caste system, it is set up to keep you in the same class unless you really try to go up or down.


No it isn't. It should be set up to protect people's property rights. Protecting people's property rights does nothing to keep them rich or poor (except prohibit you from taking people's property to bestow on those who have neither earned nor deserve it)

Quote:
 

Quote:
 
They have equality under the law and yes you are saying that they should live off my paycheck.

I said good life. If you can't support yourself, you should be kept alive and have a chance to get up on your feet, nothing more.


Why should you be able to take someone's property and give it to someone else who hasn't earned it and doesn't deserve it? On what basis do you do that and then limit your theft to your arbitrary notion of what they need to have a "chance?"

Quote:
 

Quote:
 
No, because I'm not paternalistic and arrogent enough to attempt to use government force to live someone else's life for them.

How am I forcing them to live a certain way? I am just giving them education so they are less likely to make a mistake. If they do make a mistake then, it is their fault.


Its already their fault, education or not. You're responsible for your own actions and for seeking out your own education. We've generously helped people by providing a collectively supported education system. Not content with that, you demand more. When you give them more and they still fail what's to keep you or someone like you from demanding yet more again?

Quote:
 

Quote:
 
Not when the government is denied the power to begin with. That's what I want to do; deny government the power to transfer money from one person to a person of some favored class.

I just want to take away the natural advantage of being born into a rich family. I don't think everyone should be paid the same, just that you should earn what you get.


Outrageous! You want to take away someone's natural advantage for being born rich? Why don't we take away your natural advantage for being born rich too? After all, compared to the third world, you're rich. You should be stripped of all your property until you're equal to a african peasent so that we can be sure you earn what you get.

We're back to the bottom line. With some vague abstract gooey feelings of fairness you want to steal from one class of person to bestow upon some favored class who neither has earned nor deserves such a bounty.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
piercehawkeye45
Member Avatar
Franklin Pierce
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I think you're misunderstanding what I am saying as equal chances. I am not saying that everyone should be raised in the same enviorment but everyone has an equal chance to succeed. If someone else can prove they are better than me at a job then they deserve that job. If they can't prove it then they shouldn't get it. Just because your dad was good at a job doesn't mean you are, you have to prove that you are the best.

Quote:
 
You can't give everyone an equal chance to succeed in absolute terms because people are not equal, some are better than others

I know, right now we have a limited pool of people to choose from for a job. I want to expand the pool, you want to restrict it. The best person should get the job whether he was born poor or rich.

Quote:
 
No it isn't. It should be set up to protect people's property rights. Protecting people's property rights does nothing to keep them rich or poor (except prohibit you from taking people's property to bestow on those who have neither earned nor deserve it)

No, you should make it harder for people to keep their larger property so they have to work to keep it. If they can't keep it then they will lose it someone that can keep it.

Quote:
 
Its already their fault, education or not.

If they are not warned or told of the consquences, then they won't do anything to prevent it from happening.

Quote:
 
We've generously helped people by providing a collectively supported education system. Not content with that, you demand more. When you give them more and they still fail what's to keep you or someone like you from demanding yet more again?

Fair educational system? Go to an inner city school and go to a suburban school and look at the differences. You can not say that the government does a good job at giving every kid a fair chance to succeed.
Dropped the atomic bomb let them know that it's real
Speak soft with a big stick do what I say or be killed
I'm America!

I have found the enemy and he is us.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Killer Bee
Member Avatar

Admin
Quote:
 
No, I'm not for steralization or government controls on who can have kids or how many kids they can have.  I'm strictly against having society pay for someone else's kids.  You don't have the right to take my money to raise someone else's kids anymore than I have the right to tell them that they can't have kids.  I need to run for elected office, this country is really messed up apparently.


We're apparently at an impass here, Falcon. You say that society shouldn't have to pay for someone elses kids, and I say that you or no one has the right to determine whether someone has kids or not. There's really no solution to this problem except for government intervention, and we both don't agree with that aspect. So, which can it be?

Quote:
 
Average price of attendance, as I understand it, factors in cost of living.  News flash, you have to live whether you're going to school or not.  Even if you go by the cost of attendance column (which is silly) they are still being helped significantly.  If you still can't afford to go to school (because you had kids when you couldn't afford them) then its still not my problem.


I can't say I agree. I've spent 3 and a half years at a university, and when you factor in room and board costs, these numbers don't even come close. But, it does vary between state and private institutions. Being helped significantly doesn't really mean "help" at all. When you factor in buying books, food plans(which some universities require whether you live on campus or commute) $3000 per quarter doesn't mean squat. You might as well just take out loans and go into debt for ever because it's actually cheaper in the short run than paying out of pocket. Your problem? I'm glad you view everyone elses situitations on whether they are important because it's your problem or not.

Quote:
 
Always glad to amuse.


...and you do, more than you think.


I was just reading over an earlier post of yours, Falcon, and I ran across this little dandy of a statement:

Quote:
 
You can't give everyone an equal chance to succeed in absolute terms because people are not equal, some are better than others, nor is it just or fair to try because you inevitably infringe on people's liberty.


Do you mind explaining how one person is "better" than another? The implied meaning of your statement is saying that everyone is not equal, that wealth or heratige makes one better than another. You said in another topic something I said could verge on being a racist remark. This statement borderlines prejudice and definatley racism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Falcon
Member Avatar
Apocalyptic Usher
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
I think you're misunderstanding what I am saying as equal chances. I am not saying that everyone should be raised in the same enviorment but everyone has an equal chance to succeed. If someone else can prove they are better than me at a job then they deserve that job. If they can't prove it then they shouldn't get it. Just because your dad was good at a job doesn't mean you are, you have to prove that you are the best.


I agree with the sentiment behind this statement. My only disagreement would be that the job belongs to whoever the person offering the job wants to give it to. Hopefully, for their own good if no one else's, they'll pick the most qualified, but if they want to shoot themselves in the foot by hiring someone else that's their right.

Quote:
 

Quote:
 
You can't give everyone an equal chance to succeed in absolute terms because people are not equal, some are better than others

I know, right now we have a limited pool of people to choose from for a job. I want to expand the pool, you want to restrict it. The best person should get the job whether he was born poor or rich.


I want to protect people's property rights. I disagree that doing so would shrink the pool of people available for a job.

Quote:
 

Quote:
 
No it isn't. It should be set up to protect people's property rights. Protecting people's property rights does nothing to keep them rich or poor (except prohibit you from taking people's property to bestow on those who have neither earned nor deserve it)

No, you should make it harder for people to keep their larger property so they have to work to keep it. If they can't keep it then they will lose it someone that can keep it.


Why should we make it harder than it already is?

Quote:
 

Quote:
 
Its already their fault, education or not.

If they are not warned or told of the consquences, then they won't do anything to prevent it from happening.


Warn them during the K-12 education we've already got.

Quote:
 

Quote:
 
We've generously helped people by providing a collectively supported education system. Not content with that, you demand more. When you give them more and they still fail what's to keep you or someone like you from demanding yet more again?

Fair educational system? Go to an inner city school and go to a suburban school and look at the differences. You can not say that the government does a good job at giving every kid a fair chance to succeed.


I'm all for fixing the current system where it is broke. What I'm not for is an endless expansion of the system.

Killer Bee
Quote:
 

We're apparently at an impass here, Falcon. You say that society shouldn't have to pay for someone elses kids, and I say that you or no one has the right to determine whether someone has kids or not. There's really no solution to this problem except for government intervention, and we both don't agree with that aspect. So, which can it be?


I'm not saying that I have a right to determine if they have kids or not. I don't know how I canmake this any clearer than I already am. You can have all the kids you want, what you cannot do is have society pay for them. The solution is to have no government intervention at all. The government stays out completely, it doesn't have any imput on how many kids you have nor does it help you support however many kids you decide to have.

Quote:
 
I can't say I agree. I've spent 3 and a half years at a university, and when you factor in room and board costs, these numbers don't even come close. But, it does vary between state and private institutions. Being helped significantly doesn't really mean "help" at all. When you factor in buying books, food plans(which some universities require whether you live on campus or commute) $3000 per quarter doesn't mean squat. You might as well just take out loans and go into debt for ever because it's actually cheaper in the short run than paying out of pocket. Your problem? I'm glad you view everyone elses situitations on whether they are important because it's your problem or not.


You've got a choice; if you're poor and relying on $3,000 in retraining then you can't afford anything except schools with the bare minimum in tuition costs, the bare minimum in housing and food expenses, etc... If loans work better for you (government subsidized by the way) then do that. The opportunity is there though, for those who want to use it.

Quote:
 
I was just reading over an earlier post of yours, Falcon, and I ran across this little dandy of a statement:


QUOTE  (me)
You can't give everyone an equal chance to succeed in absolute terms because people are not equal, some are better than others, nor is it just or fair to try because you inevitably infringe on people's liberty.



Do you mind explaining how one person is "better" than another? The implied meaning of your statement is saying that everyone is not equal, that wealth or heratige makes one better than another. You said in another topic something I said could verge on being a racist remark. This statement borderlines prejudice and definatley racism.


Most of the examples are physical; some people can run faster, some slower, variations in eyesight, etc... There's nothing racial about it, or prejudicial (you can't know who is better until you see everyone perform) its all individual. Sometimes training and effort can have a less capable person catch up to a more capable person. Everything that people measure ability in has a spectrum of people ranging from the best to the worst, though, no matter how you look at it. With that much variation its impossible to equalize so just acknowledge it and move on. I know lots of people who are superior to me in one way or another, but I don't get bent out of shape over it, I just go on doing the best that I can do and measuring my success by whether I think I've achieved what my potential allows me to achieve. I won't be disappointed unless I feel that I didn't put forth my best effort, even if in the end I still lose, or do more poorly than the next person, or whatever.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Killer Bee
Member Avatar

Admin
Quote:
 
Most of the examples are physical; some people can run faster, some slower, variations in eyesight, etc...  There's nothing racial about it, or prejudicial (you can't know who is better until you see everyone perform) its all individual.  Sometimes training and effort can have a less capable person catch up to a more capable person.  Everything that people measure ability in has a spectrum of people ranging from the best to the worst, though, no matter how you look at it.  With that much variation its impossible to equalize so just acknowledge it and move on.  I know lots of people who are superior to me in one way or another, but I don't get bent out of shape over it, I just go on doing the best that I can do and measuring my success by whether I think I've achieved what my potential allows me to achieve.  I won't be disappointed unless I feel that I didn't put forth my best effort, even if in the end I still lose, or do more poorly than the next person, or whatever.


I understand what you're getting at here, but being more physically gifted or having a higher intelligence level doesn't make one person better than another. It can't be an overall comparison. Example: I can say that I'm better at my job than you would be. Reason is that this is what I went to school for and have more experience in doing it than you would. It doesn't mean with proper education and training you couldn't do it. So, in one case, I might be better. But, overall better than you, I can't say I am.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Falcon
Member Avatar
Apocalyptic Usher
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Killer Bee
Feb 9 2007, 10:01 PM
Quote:
 
Most of the examples are physical; some people can run faster, some slower, variations in eyesight, etc...  There's nothing racial about it, or prejudicial (you can't know who is better until you see everyone perform) its all individual.  Sometimes training and effort can have a less capable person catch up to a more capable person.  Everything that people measure ability in has a spectrum of people ranging from the best to the worst, though, no matter how you look at it.  With that much variation its impossible to equalize so just acknowledge it and move on.  I know lots of people who are superior to me in one way or another, but I don't get bent out of shape over it, I just go on doing the best that I can do and measuring my success by whether I think I've achieved what my potential allows me to achieve.  I won't be disappointed unless I feel that I didn't put forth my best effort, even if in the end I still lose, or do more poorly than the next person, or whatever.


I understand what you're getting at here, but being more physically gifted or having a higher intelligence level doesn't make one person better than another. It can't be an overall comparison. Example: I can say that I'm better at my job than you would be. Reason is that this is what I went to school for and have more experience in doing it than you would. It doesn't mean with proper education and training you couldn't do it. So, in one case, I might be better. But, overall better than you, I can't say I am.

Okay, sorry for the misunderstanding, but it appears we agree.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Killer Bee
Member Avatar

Admin
Falcon
Feb 9 2007, 10:07 PM
Killer Bee
Feb 9 2007, 10:01 PM
Quote:
 
Most of the examples are physical; some people can run faster, some slower, variations in eyesight, etc...  There's nothing racial about it, or prejudicial (you can't know who is better until you see everyone perform) its all individual.  Sometimes training and effort can have a less capable person catch up to a more capable person.  Everything that people measure ability in has a spectrum of people ranging from the best to the worst, though, no matter how you look at it.  With that much variation its impossible to equalize so just acknowledge it and move on.  I know lots of people who are superior to me in one way or another, but I don't get bent out of shape over it, I just go on doing the best that I can do and measuring my success by whether I think I've achieved what my potential allows me to achieve.  I won't be disappointed unless I feel that I didn't put forth my best effort, even if in the end I still lose, or do more poorly than the next person, or whatever.


I understand what you're getting at here, but being more physically gifted or having a higher intelligence level doesn't make one person better than another. It can't be an overall comparison. Example: I can say that I'm better at my job than you would be. Reason is that this is what I went to school for and have more experience in doing it than you would. It doesn't mean with proper education and training you couldn't do it. So, in one case, I might be better. But, overall better than you, I can't say I am.

Okay, sorry for the misunderstanding, but it appears we agree.

No problem.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
piercehawkeye45
Member Avatar
Franklin Pierce
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
I disagree that doing so would shrink the pool of people available for a job.

I'm not talking about property rights with this. I am saying that many potentially qualified people in the inner city are not getting a chance to succeed and their jobs are taken by less qualified, richer kids. The bigger pool we have, the more qualified people we will get.

Quote:
 
Warn them during the K-12 education we've already got.

Exactly, but we are not.

Quote:
 
I'm all for fixing the current system where it is broke. What I'm not for is an endless expansion of the system.

Right now I just want to fix the school system so everyone wants to get an equal chance and not having people starving on the streets. In all seriousness, I know all extreme left winged economies are utopias (not eutopias) but I think we should strive to get as close as we can.


For the better than something else thing. People are born unequal, some are more talented than others, but no one's life is worth more than anyone's else.
Dropped the atomic bomb let them know that it's real
Speak soft with a big stick do what I say or be killed
I'm America!

I have found the enemy and he is us.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DeadZoneCuba
Member Avatar
Disgraced Dictator
[ *  *  * ]
Remember when this thread was about the Iranian President? Heh.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DirkNL
Member Avatar
Horrific poster
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
DeadZoneCuba
Feb 10 2007, 06:11 PM
Remember when this thread was about the Iranian President? Heh.

It's the usual stuff. Make a thread, wait till it's about 5 pages long and it will be totally derailed and consisting of at least one agrument (usually against Falcon).

-Dirk
Posted Image
Posted ImageHail the wallflipping monochrome computer thingyPosted Image
98% of the internet population has a Myspace. If you're part of the 2% that isn't an emo bastard, copy and paste this into your sig.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
piercehawkeye45
Member Avatar
Franklin Pierce
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
DeadZoneCuba
Feb 10 2007, 12:11 PM
Remember when this thread was about the Iranian President? Heh.

If you have anything else you would like to share it would probably be best to start a new thread.
Dropped the atomic bomb let them know that it's real
Speak soft with a big stick do what I say or be killed
I'm America!

I have found the enemy and he is us.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
NeoAegis
Member Avatar
Israel thug life
Admin
Actually, if someone wants to revive the original topic of the thread, I would say topicality would be enforced in this case.

And at any rate, someone would respond.
Posted Image Posted Image
Posted Image
Exit Mundi Post of the Year
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brutus
Member Avatar
Planning World Domination
[ *  *  *  * ]
Posted Image


fare thee well Mahmoud Ahmadinejad!! i always loved you!!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Falcon
Member Avatar
Apocalyptic Usher
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
piercehawkeye45
Quote:
 

I'm not talking about property rights with this. I am saying that many potentially qualified people in the inner city are not getting a chance to succeed and their jobs are taken by less qualified, richer kids. The bigger pool we have, the more qualified people we will get.


I'm all for giving everyone the same basic quality of K-12 education. I agree that the inner cities need to have their systems fixed.

Quote:
 

Exactly, but we are not [warning them about making poor life choices].


It doesn't require more money to do so though.

Quote:
 
Right now I just want to fix the school system so everyone wants to get an equal chance and not having people starving on the streets. In all seriousness, I know all extreme left winged economies are utopias (not eutopias) but I think we should strive to get as close as we can.


For the better than something else thing. People are born unequal, some are more talented than others, but no one's life is worth more than anyone's else.


I agree that one person's life isn't and shouldn't be worth more than another's. That's why I'm so adament against taking a piece of one person's life (property represents a piece of your life that you've given up to earn) and giving it to another person of a favored class.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and Religion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Theme Made by Sionthede of the IFSZ.