Another Civics Lesson

[jpinpb]

I understand the two different scenarios. However, look at Obama. Single mom. There are many people that struggle but still have choices.

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=CA renter]Are you claiming that these two people have the same opportunity to succeed in life?[/quote]

CA Renter, please note that Bobby did not claim that everyone has the same opportunity. What he did claim was that the argument that you can only succeed if born into wealth is not true. These are different arguments. It is possible to believe 1) life is unfair and some are born with more advantages AND 2) some will succeed despite the circumstances they are born into. There is nothing mutually exclusive about these two different beliefs. Can you see that these are different arguments?

From my own perspective, this civics lesson has the same fault that the previous civics lesson thread had. Neither example really reflects life. Both have enough truth to make them seem plausible at a casual reading but upon closer inspection they are both based on core beliefs that my experience has lead me to question.

In the previous thread, underlying the argument was the belief that everyone is lazy and unless given personal motivation they would not study. This ignores the whole premise that people can work cooperatively for common good, or that people can be motivated out of altruistic desires.

This thread has as its core underlying argument that life is a zero sum game, and that the only way to get ahead is at the expense of others. And that those born ahead are not likely to do anything to help those that are born less fortunate, and thus there is no hope for those born into less than ideal circumstances.

To me, both threads share a very pessimistic and unrealistic view of the world. Personally, in most of the classes I attended at college, there was opportunity for all, and there was a lot of support among fellow students. Then again, I studied music at college not business, so what do I know about cut-throat competitive behavior?

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=CA renter]Are you claiming that these two people have the same opportunity to succeed in life?[/quote]

CA Renter, please note that Bobby did not claim that everyone has the same opportunity. What he did claim was that the argument that you can only succeed if born into wealth is not true. These are different arguments. It is possible to believe 1) life is unfair and some are born with more advantages AND 2) some will succeed despite the circumstances they are born into. There is nothing mutually exclusive about these two different beliefs. Can you see that these are different arguments?

From my own perspective, this civics lesson has the same fault that the previous civics lesson thread had. Neither example really reflects life. Both have enough truth to make them seem plausible at a casual reading but upon closer inspection they are both based on core beliefs that my experience has lead me to question.

In the previous thread, underlying the argument was the belief that everyone is lazy and unless given personal motivation they would not study. This ignores the whole premise that people can work cooperatively for common good, or that people can be motivated out of altruistic desires.

This thread has as its core underlying argument that life is a zero sum game, and that the only way to get ahead is at the expense of others. And that those born ahead are not likely to do anything to help those that are born less fortunate, and thus there is no hope for those born into less than ideal circumstances.

To me, both threads share a very pessimistic and unrealistic view of the world. Personally, in most of the classes I attended at college, there was opportunity for all, and there was a lot of support among fellow students. Then again, I studied music at college not business, so what do I know about cut-throat competitive behavior?

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=CA renter]Are you claiming that these two people have the same opportunity to succeed in life?[/quote]

CA Renter, please note that Bobby did not claim that everyone has the same opportunity. What he did claim was that the argument that you can only succeed if born into wealth is not true. These are different arguments. It is possible to believe 1) life is unfair and some are born with more advantages AND 2) some will succeed despite the circumstances they are born into. There is nothing mutually exclusive about these two different beliefs. Can you see that these are different arguments?

From my own perspective, this civics lesson has the same fault that the previous civics lesson thread had. Neither example really reflects life. Both have enough truth to make them seem plausible at a casual reading but upon closer inspection they are both based on core beliefs that my experience has lead me to question.

In the previous thread, underlying the argument was the belief that everyone is lazy and unless given personal motivation they would not study. This ignores the whole premise that people can work cooperatively for common good, or that people can be motivated out of altruistic desires.

This thread has as its core underlying argument that life is a zero sum game, and that the only way to get ahead is at the expense of others. And that those born ahead are not likely to do anything to help those that are born less fortunate, and thus there is no hope for those born into less than ideal circumstances.

To me, both threads share a very pessimistic and unrealistic view of the world. Personally, in most of the classes I attended at college, there was opportunity for all, and there was a lot of support among fellow students. Then again, I studied music at college not business, so what do I know about cut-throat competitive behavior?

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=CA renter]Are you claiming that these two people have the same opportunity to succeed in life?[/quote]

CA Renter, please note that Bobby did not claim that everyone has the same opportunity. What he did claim was that the argument that you can only succeed if born into wealth is not true. These are different arguments. It is possible to believe 1) life is unfair and some are born with more advantages AND 2) some will succeed despite the circumstances they are born into. There is nothing mutually exclusive about these two different beliefs. Can you see that these are different arguments?

From my own perspective, this civics lesson has the same fault that the previous civics lesson thread had. Neither example really reflects life. Both have enough truth to make them seem plausible at a casual reading but upon closer inspection they are both based on core beliefs that my experience has lead me to question.

In the previous thread, underlying the argument was the belief that everyone is lazy and unless given personal motivation they would not study. This ignores the whole premise that people can work cooperatively for common good, or that people can be motivated out of altruistic desires.

This thread has as its core underlying argument that life is a zero sum game, and that the only way to get ahead is at the expense of others. And that those born ahead are not likely to do anything to help those that are born less fortunate, and thus there is no hope for those born into less than ideal circumstances.

To me, both threads share a very pessimistic and unrealistic view of the world. Personally, in most of the classes I attended at college, there was opportunity for all, and there was a lot of support among fellow students. Then again, I studied music at college not business, so what do I know about cut-throat competitive behavior?

XBoxBoy

[XBoxBoy]

[quote=CA renter]Are you claiming that these two people have the same opportunity to succeed in life?[/quote]

CA Renter, please note that Bobby did not claim that everyone has the same opportunity. What he did claim was that the argument that you can only succeed if born into wealth is not true. These are different arguments. It is possible to believe 1) life is unfair and some are born with more advantages AND 2) some will succeed despite the circumstances they are born into. There is nothing mutually exclusive about these two different beliefs. Can you see that these are different arguments?

From my own perspective, this civics lesson has the same fault that the previous civics lesson thread had. Neither example really reflects life. Both have enough truth to make them seem plausible at a casual reading but upon closer inspection they are both based on core beliefs that my experience has lead me to question.

In the previous thread, underlying the argument was the belief that everyone is lazy and unless given personal motivation they would not study. This ignores the whole premise that people can work cooperatively for common good, or that people can be motivated out of altruistic desires.

This thread has as its core underlying argument that life is a zero sum game, and that the only way to get ahead is at the expense of others. And that those born ahead are not likely to do anything to help those that are born less fortunate, and thus there is no hope for those born into less than ideal circumstances.

To me, both threads share a very pessimistic and unrealistic view of the world. Personally, in most of the classes I attended at college, there was opportunity for all, and there was a lot of support among fellow students. Then again, I studied music at college not business, so what do I know about cut-throat competitive behavior?

XBoxBoy

[SDEngineer]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]CA Renter: I see the point you are trying to make, and it’s valid. However, you are also using examples that are diametrically polar opposites. Of course, the answer is obvious.

I’d be more curious about, say, a lower middle class white kid, whose dad is a blue collar worker with a good work ethic, who comes from an intact family and who is the product of public school and a state university or college.

Juxtapose this kid with a lower middle class Hispanic kid with a similar family with similar values and the same educational background.

I’d be willing to bet good money that those two kids enjoy the same level of success. [/quote]

I don’t think this was intended to make a point about race. It was intended to make a point about class.

Someone from a lower class background – even one that values work – has a much lower chance to succeed financially than someone brought up in an upper class background that similarly values work.

While the opportunity to succeed is always there, the fact is that under our system, most people stay in a similar financial class as their parents. They simply start out disadvantaged compared to those wealthier than them.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]CA Renter: I see the point you are trying to make, and it’s valid. However, you are also using examples that are diametrically polar opposites. Of course, the answer is obvious.

I’d be more curious about, say, a lower middle class white kid, whose dad is a blue collar worker with a good work ethic, who comes from an intact family and who is the product of public school and a state university or college.

Juxtapose this kid with a lower middle class Hispanic kid with a similar family with similar values and the same educational background.

I’d be willing to bet good money that those two kids enjoy the same level of success. [/quote]

I don’t think this was intended to make a point about race. It was intended to make a point about class.

Someone from a lower class background – even one that values work – has a much lower chance to succeed financially than someone brought up in an upper class background that similarly values work.

While the opportunity to succeed is always there, the fact is that under our system, most people stay in a similar financial class as their parents. They simply start out disadvantaged compared to those wealthier than them.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]CA Renter: I see the point you are trying to make, and it’s valid. However, you are also using examples that are diametrically polar opposites. Of course, the answer is obvious.

I’d be more curious about, say, a lower middle class white kid, whose dad is a blue collar worker with a good work ethic, who comes from an intact family and who is the product of public school and a state university or college.

Juxtapose this kid with a lower middle class Hispanic kid with a similar family with similar values and the same educational background.

I’d be willing to bet good money that those two kids enjoy the same level of success. [/quote]

I don’t think this was intended to make a point about race. It was intended to make a point about class.

Someone from a lower class background – even one that values work – has a much lower chance to succeed financially than someone brought up in an upper class background that similarly values work.

While the opportunity to succeed is always there, the fact is that under our system, most people stay in a similar financial class as their parents. They simply start out disadvantaged compared to those wealthier than them.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]CA Renter: I see the point you are trying to make, and it’s valid. However, you are also using examples that are diametrically polar opposites. Of course, the answer is obvious.

I’d be more curious about, say, a lower middle class white kid, whose dad is a blue collar worker with a good work ethic, who comes from an intact family and who is the product of public school and a state university or college.

Juxtapose this kid with a lower middle class Hispanic kid with a similar family with similar values and the same educational background.

I’d be willing to bet good money that those two kids enjoy the same level of success. [/quote]

I don’t think this was intended to make a point about race. It was intended to make a point about class.

Someone from a lower class background – even one that values work – has a much lower chance to succeed financially than someone brought up in an upper class background that similarly values work.

While the opportunity to succeed is always there, the fact is that under our system, most people stay in a similar financial class as their parents. They simply start out disadvantaged compared to those wealthier than them.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]CA Renter: I see the point you are trying to make, and it’s valid. However, you are also using examples that are diametrically polar opposites. Of course, the answer is obvious.

I’d be more curious about, say, a lower middle class white kid, whose dad is a blue collar worker with a good work ethic, who comes from an intact family and who is the product of public school and a state university or college.

Juxtapose this kid with a lower middle class Hispanic kid with a similar family with similar values and the same educational background.

I’d be willing to bet good money that those two kids enjoy the same level of success. [/quote]

I don’t think this was intended to make a point about race. It was intended to make a point about class.

Someone from a lower class background – even one that values work – has a much lower chance to succeed financially than someone brought up in an upper class background that similarly values work.

While the opportunity to succeed is always there, the fact is that under our system, most people stay in a similar financial class as their parents. They simply start out disadvantaged compared to those wealthier than them.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=jpinpb]I understand the two different scenarios. However, look at Obama. Single mom. There are many people that struggle but still have choices. [/quote]

And there always will be those success stories.

However, in the U.S. (one of the most capitalistic of the industrialized nations), vertical class mobility is far lower than in most of western Europe (where most of the nations have a more socialistic capitalist system). In other words, which economic class you are born into in the U.S. is more likely to determine where you will economically end up than in other industrialized nations.

Opportunity is there, but it’s harder to take advantage of in our system compared to many others.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=jpinpb]I understand the two different scenarios. However, look at Obama. Single mom. There are many people that struggle but still have choices. [/quote]

And there always will be those success stories.

However, in the U.S. (one of the most capitalistic of the industrialized nations), vertical class mobility is far lower than in most of western Europe (where most of the nations have a more socialistic capitalist system). In other words, which economic class you are born into in the U.S. is more likely to determine where you will economically end up than in other industrialized nations.

Opportunity is there, but it’s harder to take advantage of in our system compared to many others.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=jpinpb]I understand the two different scenarios. However, look at Obama. Single mom. There are many people that struggle but still have choices. [/quote]

And there always will be those success stories.

However, in the U.S. (one of the most capitalistic of the industrialized nations), vertical class mobility is far lower than in most of western Europe (where most of the nations have a more socialistic capitalist system). In other words, which economic class you are born into in the U.S. is more likely to determine where you will economically end up than in other industrialized nations.

Opportunity is there, but it’s harder to take advantage of in our system compared to many others.

[SDEngineer]

[quote=jpinpb]I understand the two different scenarios. However, look at Obama. Single mom. There are many people that struggle but still have choices. [/quote]

And there always will be those success stories.

However, in the U.S. (one of the most capitalistic of the industrialized nations), vertical class mobility is far lower than in most of western Europe (where most of the nations have a more socialistic capitalist system). In other words, which economic class you are born into in the U.S. is more likely to determine where you will economically end up than in other industrialized nations.

Opportunity is there, but it’s harder to take advantage of in our system compared to many others.

[Author]

Posts