Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
remember
Andrew Breitbart...American Hero
My Blog List
-
-
-
-
An Epidemic Of Biden3 years ago
-
-
FOR ME - MORE BLOG LESS F B2 years ago
-
-
Kid's Creations2 months ago
-
-
His Name Was Charles4 years ago
-
-
-
Project Reconquista Commences10 years ago
-
Sorta Makes You Wanna Cry...9 years ago
-
-
-
-
Mr. AOW Has Gone Home3 years ago
-
-
Compare and Contrast2 days ago
-
-
Wow. I Lost Myself6 years ago
-
-
-
Can You Hear Us Now?2 days ago
-
VALENTINES DAY! :-)4 years ago
20 comments:
1/ Household income comparison is a meaningless stat across a long period of time since the structure of household changes. More and more singles, more one-parent household, etc... We need to start looking at income per capita. People really have to start paying attention at those stats and what they really mean within a specific context!
2/ As far as inequalities, I think they will never disappear. It's just life, human condition and nature! Would there be drive without inequalities? Would there be trade without inequalities? Not really. What we have to maintain is opportunities and create the conditions for opportunities. That's how you limit inequalities. I've never felt the feeling of class in the US like I have in France so that tells me something about letting things be instead of trying to force equality of results.
How would you ever get rid of inequality? How would you measure it?
These are utopian ideas, unworkable in real life, and quite scary in their implications.
Excellent commentary on the video and in the comments. It is counter intuitive that inequality can be a good thing, but, how can you have complete equality in an economy?
First, you don't want that, otherwise you have text book communism which has never succeeded. Secondly, if you have complete (forced) equality, you have taken incentive out of the system, and have created economic slavery.
In all the studies that focus on large inequalities of income of different groupings, mobility is never discussed. What we hear are simplistic statistics that do not take into account that the bottom wage earners have moved on after a decade, or so. Many of the people who were previously on the bottom have migrated upwards, economically.
LIberals thinking is stultified because they see only a static world. We live in a dynamic country in a dynamic world, and in a system that encourages dynamic people to excel.
liberaldude pontificates, "Lapdogs. You'll believe any crap, lol!"
This is an excellent opportunity to see if liberaldude has a vocabulary or ability to reason.
liberaldud, here's your chance to dazzle the world. What do you believe about inequalities in income?
How would you ever get rid of inequality? How would you measure it?
--------
You don't. First thing you do is try to get rid of the ridiculous meme that it's possible.
However, it is necessary, if we want a healthy society, to limit the discrepancy. That is the position of most on the left.
Or we can do a little name calling, talk about utopianism and then talk von Mise, right Silver? A man who believed that a healthy society can be built be the self interest of individual actors.
Well he's in a minority there and out in the ozone with the rest of the utopians. But you can't be sufficiently circumspect to understand your own utopianism must be adjusted.
The 9-9-9 plan will save us.
Damn, we;re in big trouble.
However, it is necessary, if we want a healthy society, to limit the discrepancy.
That's funny, coming from someone who envisions "health" somehow eminating from a permissive abortion-based society.
A man who believed that a healthy society can be built be the self interest of individual actors.
As opposed to trusting in a " Marxist revolutionary vanguard" to lead the people to conclude that only through forsaking property altogether can a communist utopia be achieved.
The collective that starves together is superior to the individual gluttons that produce and live in posperity....
However, it is necessary, if we want a healthy society, to limit the discrepancy.
Problem is: your vision of a healthy society is different from mine.
I don't find the French society healthy for example:
- lack of work and business ethics.
- difficulty to do business
- many regulations in the job market that create unemployment and make the workplace difficult sometimes, including for women . Not to mention minorities who can't find work
- more petty crime, bus and car burning, etc...
- the real class is basically government workers who get all the nice benefits and job security while others struggle with average income
- Students living with their parents till their 30, doing PhD because there's no work
- Etc...
Not super healthy to me. Actually a fairly pathetic society.
Who limits the discrepancy and how's that work? Obama? Reid? The Wizard of Oz?
Let the chips fall where they may; competition does work.
You know why I don't worry about inequalities and people who are a lot richer, more good looking, more athletic, etc.. than I am?
Because when death comes, we're all equal at the end. The money, the beauty doesn't come with it.
Let the chips fall where they may; competition does work.
------
I'm all for that, z. Grab a copy of "The Battle of Algiers" and watch the bombing scene.
That's what happens when you push too far. It even comes to The Ladies Who Lunch when they chose to dine al fresco.
But you'll keep pushing, won't you.
Ducky, it would be great if you could enlighten me more. Those references mean nothing to me as I'm movie ignorant. So please explain your point in clear, non-esoteric and Frogburger-friendly language.
Ducky, FrogBurger has a point. It would be helpful for you to articulate your point, and only use references to support that point. Letting your references make your point is, well, pointless, because nobody is going to look up your stuff, anyway, if they don't know what the point is.
Besides, I don't remember movies or books of fiction being valid references for anything. Indeed, my favorite movies are The Blues Brothers, Animal House, Smokey And The Bandit, and War of The Worlds (I and II).
You can use any of those movies as a reference source, and I would understand. Otherwise, please make your point independent of movies and hyperlinks.
That's the point.
Ducky uses such references because he likes to feel smug, smart and superior and he figures that we dummies couldn't possibly grasp his meaning.
Ugh.
The problem of Ducky is that he confuses knowledge with intelligence.
He's also confused internally I think. Otherwise he would be clear in his writing. Clear writing reflects a clear mind i.e. someone who has done thought things through beyond mere emotions. Movies are great b/c they're about emotions and so they support his points.
If I were to listen to my emotions on the problem of the world, I'd be a duck too. But I've decided to grow beyond my years of highschool and early college and become an adult.
Mr. Epstein speaks the truth. Common sense is such a relief to listen to.
One can't have a healthy work ethic, if he has no incentive to succeed, which in my book, is becoming the best you can be in your area of work and talent!
It doesn't come in a pretty gift box with a bow on it.
Ducky, why are you so amazingly angry?
And why do you insist on pushing stuff at Conservative blogs that you know are so easily negated by bright Conservatives? Masochism?
FrogBurger, it's amazing you said this:
"The problem of Ducky is that he confuses knowledge with intelligence. "
Because I realized the other day after reading one of Ducky's comments that it's not knowledge he has but memory, and I wrote that at SilverFiddle's. Interesting that you had the similar thought. Not intelligence, but memory. He remembers but he doesn't support anything he remembers and expects us just to have a palm to forehead moment over everything he says as if we haven't read or listened to both sides of most issues and made educated decisions. There's a hubris in the Left I'll never quite understand..an ego..
The left just can't STAND that everyone doesn't buy their stuff and it needs to resort to stupid little remarks to justify themselves; it's so often the case.
It's funny, but Hernnstein & Murray's "The Bell Curve" foretold the emergence of a cognitive elite. And it's no coincidence that the income disparities at both tail ends of Bell Curve would increase exponentially.
All this wealth and innovation and technological progress of the past century is a result of allowing the very smartest amongst us to get an education, network, and innovate.
Excellent point Z. Powerful memory he does have but he doesn't have the intelligence to connect the dots to transform his memory into something that makes sense.
My memory sucks on the other hand. But I see that as a male trait ;-)
Speedy: I read The Bell Curve many years ago, and finally threw the book away to make room for newer ones on the bookshelf. The authors were excoriated by liberals and the liberal media because the didn't read the book, only the chapter on race.
They never understood the point of the book. Here in Atlanta, GA we have those enclaves of the intelligentsia where the people have the big incomes, and the big jobs.
We do, indeed, have a society where intelligence is the basic measuring device. The disparity in income groups mirrors the forcasts of Herrnstein and Murry.
In case anyone is interested, here's part of the Amazon.com book description.
"Breaking new ground and old taboos, Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray tell the story of a society in transformation. At the top, a cognitive elite is forming in which the passkey to the best schools and the best jobs is no longer social background but high intelligence. At the bottom, the common denominator of the underclass is increasingly low intelligence rather than racial or social disadvantage. "
Post a Comment