4 ms·
I disagree because I think children should not be punished for the quality of their parent(s). I also think you are making a big (and incorrect) assumption tha
by ebencooke 9y ago
I disagree because I think children should not be punished for the quality of their parent(s).
I also think you are making a big (and incorrect) assumption that children who do not receive "investment" have parents that are neglecting them, rather than have parents who lack the means to make a substantial "investment".
- Jabanga 9y agoI mean some people are born smarter than others. Maybe low IQ people deserve a monthly stipend, that high-IQ people are forced to pay, to compensate them for how unfair the universe was to them. I'm sorry for the facetiousness, but I just don't see any reasonable case for the government playing this kind of role in society. It all seems very moralizing and controlling.
- TheOtherHobbes 9y agoDoes it work better when low IQ people "deserve" to be shafted by high IQ people for being stupid? Is that any less moralising and controlling?
- Jabanga 9y agoHow are they being shafted? As for whether they deserve to be born rich, poor, smart, dumb, it's not for the government to say who deserves to be born with what.
- douche 9y agoHarrison Bergeron was supposed to be a work of satire, but I'm not sure it won't prove to be prescient, these days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrison_Bergeron
- Jabanga 9y agoThat's frighteningly true.
- vibrato 9y agoThere's no way to avoid children being punished or rewarded for the quality of their parents. At a minimum, they are the DNA of their parents. Practically, parental quality in development is hugely important and how could it not be? Will the state read bedtime stories to all children?