6 ms·

So there's a lie being told to the rest of us that life is supposed to be reasonably fair and that we're supposed to work toward keeping it that way. Keeping th

by Trundle 10y ago

So there's a lie being told to the rest of us that life is supposed to be reasonably fair and that we're supposed to work toward keeping it that way. Keeping that lie while many people are intentionally trying to subvert the concept by having kids start life at different points is an unnecessary cruelty. By all means hand them advantages, but don't then go and try to mingle them with the lower classes. Don't act like we're all in this together. Don't force my poor past self to listen to the girl sitting next to me in class talk to her friend about owning 7 houses. If we're going to settle for feudalism can we at least just call it feudalism and set the bar at appropriate heights for each class? Why the hell do I need to be put up against your performance enhanced kid when it comes to success? Just have me toil in your lands where I compete against all the other serfs instead. If you're going to start people off in life ahead of me at least give me the courtesy of degrees of separation. Pretending at equality while everyone is rigging the game is trying to have your cake and eat it too.

battlebot 10y ago
I'm not sure if I should upvote this or not... I mean, I went to a "less competitive" college to start out with, then ended up at a major university for a masters and then another major university for a PhD. I have definitely been upwardly mobile due to my education and it didn't cause me much debt. No, I'm not a 1%er, but my station in life improved greatly from the humble place I started from. That's the American Dream, right? No guarantees, just maybe a chance at something better. I would stress about all these legacy rich folks--a lot of them don't amount to much. They party, do drugs, flame out young. And then again, in some ways I totally agree with what you're saying--it isn't fair to tell a kid they can become a CEO when in fact the people who become CEOs are picked from a very select, elite group.
cookiecaper 10y ago
>So there's a lie being told to the rest of us that life is supposed to be reasonably fair and that we're supposed to work toward keeping it that way. Keeping that lie while many people are intentionally trying to subvert the concept by having kids start life at different points is an unnecessary cruelty. The goal is equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. Even that is loose, because of course no one has exactly the same advantage profile (and no one has exactly the same disadvantage profile either). As upsetting as tactless people can be, the fact that children from a family that is struggling to make ends meet freely mingle with children from families that have abundance, even excess, is a very positive and rare thing. We should treasure it. The belief that everyone has something important to contribute and that people from all backgrounds, creeds, and prosperity levels working and learning together will result in a better world is unique, and we absolutely should not be longing for its more conventional opposite: a world where everyone is divided up so that their feelings are protected from heterogeneity.
- crdoconnor 10y ago
  >The goal is equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. If that truly were the goal, 100% inheritance tax would be the policy.
  - cookiecaper 10y ago
    You're conflating opportunity with outcome. Opportunity is abstract; it's a system that doesn't create artificial barriers to success, and in which your average person won't be actively disallowed from amassing resources. Opportunity basically means that everyone has the same rights of access to the marketplace. It doesn't make any guarantee about anyone's success once they enter that marketplace. While I'm sure we're not perfect here, we're pretty good overall. Outcome is bona fide; it's the resource access that allows people to do the things they wish to do, not the market access that allows one to generate those resources. Since we don't have a substantial, legally-enforced caste system or other artificial limitations on success in America, it doesn't look like opportunity has anything to do with money (unless you're referring to the excessive fees and qualifications which the government imposes to engage in some types of business (licensing bodies, etc.)), so I'm not sure why you say that confiscating a family's resources will ensure opportunity for anybody.
    - crdoconnor 10y ago
      >Opportunity basically means that everyone has the same rights of access to the marketplace. It doesn't make any guarantee about anyone's success once they enter that marketplace. Having money (derived from inheritance or anywhere else) gives you privileged access to the marketplace since it helps you get over natural as well as artificial barriers to entry. This is exactly why the unifying feature of entrepreneurs is not a greater appetite for risk (quite the opposite), but access to cash - often from parents: http://www.andrewoswald.com/docs/entrepre.pdf http://www.andrewoswald.com/docs/entrepre.pdf >Since we don't have a substantial, legally-enforced caste system or other artificial limitations on success in America, Access to wealth is an artificial limitation on success and it's largely what the American caste system is geared around. >I'm not sure why you say that confiscating a family's resources will ensure opportunity for anybody. Opportunity flows from resources. You can act like you don't care about equality of opportunity or you can support a 100% inheritance tax (and no private education) but you can't really have it both ways.
mjolk 10y ago
> So there's a lie being told to the rest of us that life is supposed to be reasonably fair and that we're supposed to work toward keeping it that way. Whoever told you that did you a massive disservice. You're not entitled to what others have; you get what you create. > Why the hell do I need to be put up against your performance enhanced kid when it comes to success? Just have me toil in your lands where I compete against all the other serfs instead. If you're going to start people off in life ahead of me at least give me the courtesy of degrees of separation. Pretending at equality while everyone is rigging the game is trying to have your cake and eat it too. Drop the histrionics; at least in the US and Canada, the game isn't that rigged, especially in fields where merit and effort matters (and within tech, I've noticed PR, marketing, other non STEM to be where the 'connected' get promoted). I grew up relatively poor and my kids will grow up significantly better off because you can earn your way into better opportunities (and I say this not being particularly smart).
- vivekd 10y ago
  >(and within tech, I've noticed PR, marketing, other non STEM to be where the 'connected' get promoted). I think you hit on something important, this merit and skills based promotion is something unique to tech where there is a culture of meritocracy. That doesn't exist in many fields and in many fields people get where there are solely because of who their parents were rather than what their parents taught them, and that applies even in the United States and Canada

by Trundle 10y ago

battlebot 10y ago

I'm not sure if I should upvote this or not... I mean, I went to a "less competitive" college to start out with, then ended up at a major university for a masters and then another major university for a PhD. I have definitely been upwardly mobile due to my education and it didn't cause me much debt. No, I'm not a 1%er, but my station in life improved greatly from the humble place I started from. That's the American Dream, right? No guarantees, just maybe a chance at something better. I would stress about all these legacy rich folks--a lot of them don't amount to much. They party, do drugs, flame out young. And then again, in some ways I totally agree with what you're saying--it isn't fair to tell a kid they can become a CEO when in fact the people who become CEOs are picked from a very select, elite group.

cookiecaper 10y ago

>So there's a lie being told to the rest of us that life is supposed to be reasonably fair and that we're supposed to work toward keeping it that way. Keeping that lie while many people are intentionally trying to subvert the concept by having kids start life at different points is an unnecessary cruelty. The goal is equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. Even that is loose, because of course no one has exactly the same advantage profile (and no one has exactly the same disadvantage profile either). As upsetting as tactless people can be, the fact that children from a family that is struggling to make ends meet freely mingle with children from families that have abundance, even excess, is a very positive and rare thing. We should treasure it. The belief that everyone has something important to contribute and that people from all backgrounds, creeds, and prosperity levels working and learning together will result in a better world is unique, and we absolutely should not be longing for its more conventional opposite: a world where everyone is divided up so that their feelings are protected from heterogeneity.

crdoconnor 10y ago
>The goal is equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. If that truly were the goal, 100% inheritance tax would be the policy.
- cookiecaper 10y ago
  You're conflating opportunity with outcome. Opportunity is abstract; it's a system that doesn't create artificial barriers to success, and in which your average person won't be actively disallowed from amassing resources. Opportunity basically means that everyone has the same rights of access to the marketplace. It doesn't make any guarantee about anyone's success once they enter that marketplace. While I'm sure we're not perfect here, we're pretty good overall. Outcome is bona fide; it's the resource access that allows people to do the things they wish to do, not the market access that allows one to generate those resources. Since we don't have a substantial, legally-enforced caste system or other artificial limitations on success in America, it doesn't look like opportunity has anything to do with money (unless you're referring to the excessive fees and qualifications which the government imposes to engage in some types of business (licensing bodies, etc.)), so I'm not sure why you say that confiscating a family's resources will ensure opportunity for anybody.
  - crdoconnor 10y ago
    >Opportunity basically means that everyone has the same rights of access to the marketplace. It doesn't make any guarantee about anyone's success once they enter that marketplace. Having money (derived from inheritance or anywhere else) gives you privileged access to the marketplace since it helps you get over natural as well as artificial barriers to entry. This is exactly why the unifying feature of entrepreneurs is not a greater appetite for risk (quite the opposite), but access to cash - often from parents: http://www.andrewoswald.com/docs/entrepre.pdf http://www.andrewoswald.com/docs/entrepre.pdf >Since we don't have a substantial, legally-enforced caste system or other artificial limitations on success in America, Access to wealth is an artificial limitation on success and it's largely what the American caste system is geared around. >I'm not sure why you say that confiscating a family's resources will ensure opportunity for anybody. Opportunity flows from resources. You can act like you don't care about equality of opportunity or you can support a 100% inheritance tax (and no private education) but you can't really have it both ways.

mjolk 10y ago

> So there's a lie being told to the rest of us that life is supposed to be reasonably fair and that we're supposed to work toward keeping it that way. Whoever told you that did you a massive disservice. You're not entitled to what others have; you get what you create. > Why the hell do I need to be put up against your performance enhanced kid when it comes to success? Just have me toil in your lands where I compete against all the other serfs instead. If you're going to start people off in life ahead of me at least give me the courtesy of degrees of separation. Pretending at equality while everyone is rigging the game is trying to have your cake and eat it too. Drop the histrionics; at least in the US and Canada, the game isn't that rigged, especially in fields where merit and effort matters (and within tech, I've noticed PR, marketing, other non STEM to be where the 'connected' get promoted). I grew up relatively poor and my kids will grow up significantly better off because you can earn your way into better opportunities (and I say this not being particularly smart).

vivekd 10y ago
>(and within tech, I've noticed PR, marketing, other non STEM to be where the 'connected' get promoted). I think you hit on something important, this merit and skills based promotion is something unique to tech where there is a culture of meritocracy. That doesn't exist in many fields and in many fields people get where there are solely because of who their parents were rather than what their parents taught them, and that applies even in the United States and Canada