3 ms·
There's capitalism in a nutshell. Except first prize was granted by your parents and upbringing. Second prize was partially because of parents and upbringing,
by crankylinuxuser 9y ago
There's capitalism in a nutshell.
Except first prize was granted by your parents and upbringing. Second prize was partially because of parents and upbringing, but with a bit more luck.
And bronze? Yeah, well they're just lazy and bad and they deserve what little they have - cause the Gold and Silver earned what they have.
- fastball 9y agoAnd this goes all the way back to the proverbial Adam and Eve? Don't we then all have the same ancestors and therefore all equal opportunity?
- crankylinuxuser 9y ago1. I didn't bring religion into this. You did. 2. I reject to what amounts to a nice story with no basis in fact. If I remember my judeao-christian studies, the woman was less than the man in those stories. 3. It is evident that even being born, not all babies are equal. And that's before we consider socioeconomic status. Should humans be considered as equal? Of course. However its quite easily demonstrated that people aren't. This is reductio ad absurdio.
- prawn 9y agoI think you can ignore the religious mention and in good-faith (ha!) take their point to be that we ultimately have common ancestors. Then respond that your family has a strong effect but it's not the only one.
- s73v3r_ 9y ago"Don't we then all have the same ancestors and therefore all equal opportunity?" Just about every study done on the subject shows that the family you're born into has a HUGE effect on how successful you'll be in life.
- fastball 9y agoYes, and presumably some parents work hard to give their children a good future and some do not. Is this irrelevant? Why is it not acceptable for someone that had better parents to do better?
- crankylinuxuser 9y agoThat's because children are seen as innocent. We can blame someone in poverty of "making bad choices"... What choice is there for a newborn to make bad choices? Yet, we have little issue,society speaking, condemning a baby and their family to a life of poverty to continue that cycle. Or should we say that the newborn/baby deserves lack of medical care, substandard food or hunger,substandard housing, less/lacking education? If you believe they deserve that, can you explain what actions a baby can do differently?
- s73v3r_ 9y agoHard work of the parents doesn't really factor into it. It's the social standing of the parents. A single mom who works 2 jobs works harder than most of us on this board. Yet, our kids are going to have it much, much, much easier than hers would. "Why is it not acceptable for someone that had better parents to do better?" If your whole schtick is about "meritocracy", then having people start out better by default defeats that entire thing.
- crankylinuxuser 9y agoOne thing about meritocracies - someone gives the merits and demerits. Why do they deserve that power? What checks and balances exist to prevent them from entreanching themselves and family/friends? Follow the money and power.
- freeloop10 9y agoSuppose a average married couple had a child and also adopted a rock. By your reasoning, the rock would perform exactly as their living breathing child, right?
- dang 9y agoPlease don't do this here.
- freeloop10 9y agoWhat's so wrong with pointing out someone else's absurdity?
- dang 9y agoIt was a tacit insult taking the form of an argument. That adds no information, it just lowers discussion quality and encourages worse from others.