4 ms·

Believe it or not, there are still working blacksmiths and horse carriage drivers. But that's beside my point. My point was that the author of the article assum

by skurry 15y ago

Believe it or not, there are still working blacksmiths and horse carriage drivers. But that's beside my point. My point was that the author of the article assumes that with enough work and educational opportunity, anyone can join the meritocracy. But I believe that getting a college degree requires a certain set of talents, which I believe a sizable chunk of the population simply does not possess (I admit that I may be wrong here, and that some people might see this as offensive elitism). It's unfair that those who don't win the talent lottery should be doomed to a life in poverty. Therefore, there should be a bottom in labor compensation, and that this bottom should guarantee a certain standard of living, and that this standard of living should depend on the wealth of a society as a whole. The US has a minimum wage, but that is way to low to guarantee any sort of comfort in many parts of the country.

grandalf 15y ago
I think the amount of variation in innate human talent is vastly overstated. But every year that goes by in which a human fails to thrive (intellectually, etc.) he/she falls further and further behind. In America, many people are already significantly damaged by the 2nd or 3rd grade. By the time Junior High rolls around, it would take a drastic intervention to correct someone's course. So I think it comes back to our educational system... both those who run it and those who consume it (the people). As a daycare/assimilation system it works great, which is not surprising since this is its primary purpose. Your comment advocates a welfare state where I'd estimate the bottom 40% of earners would be on welfare. I'm not sure that such a system is good for peoples' sense of self-worth. Instead, people should realize that the secret to success is personal empowerment, learning, etc. It's never too late to learn new skills, etc. Many who share your view think that it's unreasonable to ask Joe Sixpack to learn anything new... that his pride at doing unneeded, outdated work is so precious that we should simply give him welfare. As long as society's notion of a "normal" life includes working 9 to 5, watching sports and drinking beer on weekends, etc., then few will ever have the time to improve their lot in life. Every successful person I know works like a dog and has earned what they have, at great sacrifice (skipping parties and fun activities, working weekends, late nights, etc.). The fact to be remembered is that motivation is not evenly distributed in society and that many of the people struggling are simply not all that motivated. In fact, many teach their kids to disdain learning and education, etc. Why should anyone in the US be guaranteed comfort when there are children begging in the street in Mexico or India?
- skurry 15y ago
  Regarding human talent, we both can't prove either standpoint, so we'll just leave it at that. Welfare is not the only solution to this problem. If minimum wage is not enough to allow a single mother to pay for child care, then we should just offer free child care, financed by taxes. Mom still has an incentive to work for a living, but is much better off. Scandinavian countries demonstrate that this works very well. >Why should anyone in the US be guaranteed comfort when there are children begging in the street in Mexico or India? Because as I said, the US as a society is incredibly wealthy. It's possible with a few political tweaks to fix this, and not a single person will be noticeably worse off. There's no real reason not to fix it, except for the extraordinary greed of a few.
  - grandalf 15y ago
    I don't disagree with anything you have said here, only unless you also advocate a drastic overhaul of our educational system your proposals would seem to be nothing other than the most cynical form of wealth redistribution. I think the social status quo would fall within a generation or two if the structural barriers to education were removed. Humans have a strong desire to thrive intellectually and to understand the world. The US K-12 system has done much to stifle that and train people to be obedient workers.
    - einhverfr 15y ago
      As far as wealth redistribution, we've had two great successes with this in the US. The first was the Homestead Act which helped many Americans escape poverty in order to become smallholding farmers. The second was WWII and the GI bill which constituted the greatest downward transfer of wealth in US history, and created the huge, stable, Middle Class that has survived well up until recently. The New Deal was at most just icing on the cake (and I think actually destructive to the overall trends). The wages of war, the draft, and the on-going benefits were where the real successes were.
      - grandalf 15y ago

by skurry 15y ago

grandalf 15y ago

I think the amount of variation in innate human talent is vastly overstated. But every year that goes by in which a human fails to thrive (intellectually, etc.) he/she falls further and further behind. In America, many people are already significantly damaged by the 2nd or 3rd grade. By the time Junior High rolls around, it would take a drastic intervention to correct someone's course. So I think it comes back to our educational system... both those who run it and those who consume it (the people). As a daycare/assimilation system it works great, which is not surprising since this is its primary purpose. Your comment advocates a welfare state where I'd estimate the bottom 40% of earners would be on welfare. I'm not sure that such a system is good for peoples' sense of self-worth. Instead, people should realize that the secret to success is personal empowerment, learning, etc. It's never too late to learn new skills, etc. Many who share your view think that it's unreasonable to ask Joe Sixpack to learn anything new... that his pride at doing unneeded, outdated work is so precious that we should simply give him welfare. As long as society's notion of a "normal" life includes working 9 to 5, watching sports and drinking beer on weekends, etc., then few will ever have the time to improve their lot in life. Every successful person I know works like a dog and has earned what they have, at great sacrifice (skipping parties and fun activities, working weekends, late nights, etc.). The fact to be remembered is that motivation is not evenly distributed in society and that many of the people struggling are simply not all that motivated. In fact, many teach their kids to disdain learning and education, etc. Why should anyone in the US be guaranteed comfort when there are children begging in the street in Mexico or India?

skurry 15y ago
Regarding human talent, we both can't prove either standpoint, so we'll just leave it at that. Welfare is not the only solution to this problem. If minimum wage is not enough to allow a single mother to pay for child care, then we should just offer free child care, financed by taxes. Mom still has an incentive to work for a living, but is much better off. Scandinavian countries demonstrate that this works very well. >Why should anyone in the US be guaranteed comfort when there are children begging in the street in Mexico or India? Because as I said, the US as a society is incredibly wealthy. It's possible with a few political tweaks to fix this, and not a single person will be noticeably worse off. There's no real reason not to fix it, except for the extraordinary greed of a few.
- grandalf 15y ago
  I don't disagree with anything you have said here, only unless you also advocate a drastic overhaul of our educational system your proposals would seem to be nothing other than the most cynical form of wealth redistribution. I think the social status quo would fall within a generation or two if the structural barriers to education were removed. Humans have a strong desire to thrive intellectually and to understand the world. The US K-12 system has done much to stifle that and train people to be obedient workers.
  - einhverfr 15y ago
    As far as wealth redistribution, we've had two great successes with this in the US. The first was the Homestead Act which helped many Americans escape poverty in order to become smallholding farmers. The second was WWII and the GI bill which constituted the greatest downward transfer of wealth in US history, and created the huge, stable, Middle Class that has survived well up until recently. The New Deal was at most just icing on the cake (and I think actually destructive to the overall trends). The wages of war, the draft, and the on-going benefits were where the real successes were.
    - grandalf 15y ago