7 ms·

As a guy who joined the military in order to finance my undergraduate education via the GI Bill, I believe determination and grit were necessary for me to get w

As a guy who joined the military in order to finance my undergraduate education via the GI Bill, I believe determination and grit were necessary for me to get where I am today. But I'm hardly arrogant enough believe that what was necessary for success is simultaneously sufficient for it. Considering the rise in college costs, my GI Bill yesterday would cover exactly shit today. And having empathy with people who aren't you helps a person not be an asshole, something I think you might benefit from considering.

ProAm 10y ago
> And having empathy with people who aren't you helps a person not be an asshole, something I think you might benefit from considering. Im not sure I understand this statement, I wasn't being unempathetic to anyone in my comment. I was saying I believe it is perfectly acceptable for a person to work through school for 10 years to help achieve a better life for themselves and family especially when their options are limited. I'm not trying to be confrontational, I just want to understand what you meant before I reply.
- bbcbasic 10y ago
  Looks like you were snared by a loaded question. Your yes could be seen as agreeing that wealth inequality and it's unfair effects are reasonable.
  - ProAm 10y ago
    Ah, yes I can see that. Reasonable or unreasonable doesn't matter because it's reality. Similar to some people being born better looking than others and thus often have an easier life. It's just the fact of the matter that must be dealt with, and pointless to argue the merits of it being reasonable or fair.
    - arthur_pryor 10y ago
      > Ah, yes I can see that. Reasonable or unreasonable doesn't matter because it's reality. Similar to some people being born better looking than others and thus often have an easier life. It's just the fact of the matter that must be dealt with, and pointless to argue the merits of it being reasonable or fair. i disagree wholeheartedly with your conclusion that you should just accept the situation as it is and not complain about the way the world works. it's perfectly reasonable to complain about the system in general being unjust, and it's perfectly reasonable to think that vastly differing educational opportunities make for an unjust society. to me, the attitude i see you displaying is one that would never lead to an improved society (or the existence of society in the first place, if you take that attitude back to pre-civilization times). people used this line of reasoning to argue against the need to fight for things like civil rights. i think it's a point of view that is generally bad for the world and toxic to society. we should always be striving to improve the way that the world works and the way that we behave towards one another both personally and in society at large. and specifically... > some people being born better looking than others and thus often have an easier life. It's just the fact of the matter this does not seem like a good thing to me, and i find it hard to buy as a justification for your argument. it may be the way that humans naturally function, but we do a lot of things naturally that aren't good for ourselves or society in the long run. e.g. people naturally experience bloodlust when they are greatly wronged. that doesn't make murdering your cheating spouse justifiable homicide, though at one point it would've, and in some places it still does.
      - ProAm 10y ago
        I dont disagree with your points, but its also important to view things in the macro and micro scale here. Do you want to play long ball or short ball? If I lost my job in 2008 due to the economy collapsing and had a family to take care of am I going to A) Try and fix the world because it is generally unfair or B) Get to work to support myself and my family and accept the reality I live in? Yes the world can be better, but do you not agree that sometimes making it better just means getting to work (not in the literal sense of the word but in the sense of an individual executing a plan and making his/her life better as a result). Would you rather associate with people who do nothing but complain that life is unfair and watch them wait for the world to change, or would you rather associate with people who see a problem/challenge and start solving? It's not as black and white as my previous sentence obviously, and both problems can be worked on at the same time. But I have zero issue with people who are less fortunate than others putting in hard work to make their lives better. That kind of effort and subsequent results should have a cascading positive effect on those that surround him/her, which in turn plants the seed of change you are looking for. That kind of change however will take probably decades to see and significant improvement, if you look at the widening wealth gap between the lower, middle and upper class I do not see society moving in a good direction at the moment.
    - openasocket 10y ago
      I think the point is that we can (or should) do something to change this, to make it more reasonable. A few decades ago tuition rates were a fraction of what they are now and provided the same quality of education, so certainly we can do something to return to that state.
  - logical42 10y ago
    This is basically as I understood it. Given the original comment which has thus been deleted, it wasn't a terribly far-fetched interpretation.

ProAm 10y ago

> And having empathy with people who aren't you helps a person not be an asshole, something I think you might benefit from considering. Im not sure I understand this statement, I wasn't being unempathetic to anyone in my comment. I was saying I believe it is perfectly acceptable for a person to work through school for 10 years to help achieve a better life for themselves and family especially when their options are limited. I'm not trying to be confrontational, I just want to understand what you meant before I reply.

bbcbasic 10y ago
Looks like you were snared by a loaded question. Your yes could be seen as agreeing that wealth inequality and it's unfair effects are reasonable.
- ProAm 10y ago
  Ah, yes I can see that. Reasonable or unreasonable doesn't matter because it's reality. Similar to some people being born better looking than others and thus often have an easier life. It's just the fact of the matter that must be dealt with, and pointless to argue the merits of it being reasonable or fair.
  - arthur_pryor 10y ago
    > Ah, yes I can see that. Reasonable or unreasonable doesn't matter because it's reality. Similar to some people being born better looking than others and thus often have an easier life. It's just the fact of the matter that must be dealt with, and pointless to argue the merits of it being reasonable or fair. i disagree wholeheartedly with your conclusion that you should just accept the situation as it is and not complain about the way the world works. it's perfectly reasonable to complain about the system in general being unjust, and it's perfectly reasonable to think that vastly differing educational opportunities make for an unjust society. to me, the attitude i see you displaying is one that would never lead to an improved society (or the existence of society in the first place, if you take that attitude back to pre-civilization times). people used this line of reasoning to argue against the need to fight for things like civil rights. i think it's a point of view that is generally bad for the world and toxic to society. we should always be striving to improve the way that the world works and the way that we behave towards one another both personally and in society at large. and specifically... > some people being born better looking than others and thus often have an easier life. It's just the fact of the matter this does not seem like a good thing to me, and i find it hard to buy as a justification for your argument. it may be the way that humans naturally function, but we do a lot of things naturally that aren't good for ourselves or society in the long run. e.g. people naturally experience bloodlust when they are greatly wronged. that doesn't make murdering your cheating spouse justifiable homicide, though at one point it would've, and in some places it still does.
    - ProAm 10y ago
      I dont disagree with your points, but its also important to view things in the macro and micro scale here. Do you want to play long ball or short ball? If I lost my job in 2008 due to the economy collapsing and had a family to take care of am I going to A) Try and fix the world because it is generally unfair or B) Get to work to support myself and my family and accept the reality I live in? Yes the world can be better, but do you not agree that sometimes making it better just means getting to work (not in the literal sense of the word but in the sense of an individual executing a plan and making his/her life better as a result). Would you rather associate with people who do nothing but complain that life is unfair and watch them wait for the world to change, or would you rather associate with people who see a problem/challenge and start solving? It's not as black and white as my previous sentence obviously, and both problems can be worked on at the same time. But I have zero issue with people who are less fortunate than others putting in hard work to make their lives better. That kind of effort and subsequent results should have a cascading positive effect on those that surround him/her, which in turn plants the seed of change you are looking for. That kind of change however will take probably decades to see and significant improvement, if you look at the widening wealth gap between the lower, middle and upper class I do not see society moving in a good direction at the moment.
  - openasocket 10y ago
    I think the point is that we can (or should) do something to change this, to make it more reasonable. A few decades ago tuition rates were a fraction of what they are now and provided the same quality of education, so certainly we can do something to return to that state.
- logical42 10y ago
  This is basically as I understood it. Given the original comment which has thus been deleted, it wasn't a terribly far-fetched interpretation.