If a society is to achieve growth and progress, initiative and effort has to be rewarded.
Inequality is therefore not an evil, but a necessity to achieve a good society.
Printable View
If a society is to achieve growth and progress, initiative and effort has to be rewarded.
Inequality is therefore not an evil, but a necessity to achieve a good society.
I completely agree.
There has to be a reward for striving. To reallocate wealth too zealously stifles innovation and crushes enterprise.
~:smoking:
Yes, when people use "inequality is bad" as shorthand for "unjust inequality is bad, for example such and such etc" they get into problems. But I don't think the best response is more shorthand.
Yeah. It is good only if you are in the top squad...
Joke: God said: "Some will be men and some will be women. God said: Some will be black and some will be white. God said: Some will be ugly and some will be handsome, some will be small and some will be tall.
And for the small ugly black women, it will be very hard"
So wouldn't it be more accurate to say that inequality is a necessary evil, as opposed to something good in and of itself?
Inequality, based solely on the ideal that growth and initiative should be rewarded, is only a necessary evil if the the growth and progress of society is the objective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhyfelwyr
Of course, life isn't always so perfect, right? As Brenus said, the short, ugly, black women have it hard. Especially when they are lesbians.
Sadly, there wasn't as much help to get from you guys as I thought.... :no:
Inequality in wealth so long as it doesn't become self destructive to the society is a necessary evil needed to provoke otherwise apathetic people to do work so they don't lose their current standard of living.
Inequality of opportunity? Never.
Always??Quote:
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name
My vision is dreadful - I want to fly a plane!
I'm a diabetic on insulin - I want to drive an ambulance!
I'm blind - I want to be a surgeon!
I've got Hep C and HIV - I want to be a surgeon!
There are some things that some people can't do - and to do them would be a great danger to the rest of us.
If you mean equal opportunity in the sense that there are entry requirements and those that are admitted are those that achieved greater than were stipulated - female fire-fighters is fine as long as they are strong enough to do the job for example. But it still means that from birther there are many activities that some will never be able to undertake.
~:smoking:
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
I meant equal opportunity in that if you are capable of doing it then you have the opportunity to do it. No social restrictions. Obviously the blind can't fly our planes.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
No socially accepted inequality of opportunity beyond obviously the physical predispositions we are born with (or I guess with diseases, acquire). I didn't think that needed to be said, I would have thought that I have portrayed myself as a pragmatist by now in this forum.
EDIT: An example of this would be those studies I hear every so often where otherwise extremely talented candidates for a job are turned away for someone else qualified simply because they had a "black" sounding name.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/...in575685.shtml
Equality of opportunity is meaning those who are equally qualified have an equal chance. Not in-equal because they are black, gay, etc and other conditions which do not affect the qualification of their application. Your first statements are deliberately dumb, I know you know better then that.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
Sorry, sorry - slow day at work and bored stiff. Being obtuse is a form of release... ~;)
~:smoking:
This is the more hostile version of what I just said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
C'mon Beskar, expand on it!! :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Beskar
Inequality in what sense? I notice people seem to be treating it as a given that inequality is always in reference solely to economic matters but what about gender inequality? Surely there is little that is positive to be said about that?
There are less fish there, if you want equality there it will lead to positive discrimination. As I see it we are all equals as human beings, there is no need for equality in society.Quote:
Originally Posted by CountArach
In this thread, it is only related to income inequality, other types of inequality are irrelevant.Quote:
Originally Posted by CountArach
on what do you base that? is the progress of the individual always good for society? what if the progress of the individual goes against the growth of society? I take it that you speak of economic growth and progress, but what if a few individuals eat all the cake and profit from it, will society neccesarily benefit?Quote:
If a society is to achieve growth and progress, initiative and effort has to be rewarded.
please explain me why exactly. (inequality only in economic sense) is needed to achieve a good society (also only in economic sense? or in more than economic sense?) if a society is good in economic sense but degraded of any morality (amoralistic) would that be a better society which is moralistic but in bad economic shape?Quote:
Inequality is therefore not an evil, but a necessity to achieve a good society.
and what would be your idea of a "good" society.
But why does economic inequality take primacy in our society? I'm not criticising or making any points, I'm just observing.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
I will point out Americas manufacturing was doing just fine until the civil rights act was passed
Then, nose dive
what seems so 'obvious' is often very difficult to draft into law in a coherent way that meets the objective desired by the proposer.......Quote:
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name
And the Wright Brothers weren't able to get a plane to truly fly....until after McKinley was assassinated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Only if the proposer himself is not coherent. Many subjects can be successfully legislated on, but there is always an opposition party that nit picks it apart to the point it becomes more ineffective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Furunculus