4 ms·
Well until we can understand that social hierarchy and social status are pointless values, this will continue to generate problems. What is the point of consid
by jokoon 5y ago
Well until we can understand that social hierarchy and social status are pointless values, this will continue to generate problems.
What is the point of considering that there are people that are worth more than others? Merit already doesn't work, only inheritance and social reproduction really matter.
Why are there so many people who disagree that 100% of people should have access to healthcare, food and shelter? Elites shouldn't really exist. Nobody is really above anybody else. That's the point of having human rights.
Of course some people are more specialized for certain things, but nobody is really "above" others. At best, leaders or people with responsibility are "accountable", but their efforts are done as an effort to help other, not to reap the benefits.
Market fundamentalists are going to argue that risk must be rewarded, but investors will always work hard to lower risk to a minimum to increase ROI, so why are they really rewarded at all if they reduce risk, since they argued risk must be rewarded?
- pclmulqdq 5y agoThis isn't so much about basic needs, which our societies generally provide. This is about having more than a minimum standard of living: seaside mansions aren't as abundant as 300 sq ft apartments. We're apes who are wired to show off to other apes to attract mating opportunities and secure the future of our genes (by helping our children get a leg up).
- jokoon 5y agono, that's a fallacy of nature
- pclmulqdq 5y agoIt isn't that this behavior is good because it's natural - it's good because it keeps people motivated. The problem is that unfortunately, people are not the same. Some are better physicists than others, some are better organizers, and some are better carpenters. You need some inequality of outcome to incentivize people to do what they are good at - the Soviet Union has showed us that. Having any inequality at all produces elites. You can have human rights while having inequality, and we generally do.
- jokoon 5y ago> it's good because it keeps people motivated But what is motivation, really, and do we really need it? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc short answer: motivation is not what we think it is. Does motivation matter more than happiness? > You need some inequality of outcome to incentivize people to do what they are good at - Most of those people are paid about the same anyways. All professions should be paid about the same. I don't see why inequality is necessary when so many are paid the minimum wage. There is no job that is more worthy than another. > the Soviet Union has showed us that. The soviet union was a political disaster. Corruption will cause problems in any economy. There are no proof that communism is bad because the soviet union was corrupt and collapsed. Even the notion of merit doesn't really exist. We just disagree and I honestly don't want to spend time arguing about this eternal debate.