Civics lesson

[jpinpb]

Ok. Just to really get the noggin going:

Some people argue we need to bail out the banks to help the economy in general – right or wrong, that is what they’re saying.

So – a form of corporate welfare IMO – regardless.

Some people say let the banks fail.

So if the bank fails, then if the first group is correct, we all will suffer.

We will all get F’s, in effect. It’s like a reverse socialism won’t work either.

“Society” is too connected.

Edit – we see how socialism is working on the people walking away from homes that are getting bailouts. One guy legitimately for whatever reason can’t pay the mortgage. He gets a bailout. Neighbor says, “Why should I be a sucker and pay when he gets help?” He stops paying.

Now the taxpayers get the bill as all those people walk. If no one got help, people would pay or walk and a renter takes over.

[CA renter]

[quote=SDEngineer]I have no doubt this is an urban legend.

One clue is that the professor presumably would have known the difference between socialism and communism. The example used in this class was strict communism.

Under most forms of socialism, there is still incentive to get ahead, and people are not treated exactly equally. A doctor, for example, still commands a premium wage over a ditchdigger. The difference is simply that the wage inequality which occurs under capitalism is kept somewhat in check (especially under most hybrid systems, which appear to be the most successful, which fuse elements of both capitalism and socialism together), and a minimum living standard (usually pretty low) is guaranteed to it’s citizens.

Does anyone here really think that, for example, a CEO actually should be paid 200-300x the average salary of his workers (which is roughly the current average)? Or a trust fund kiddy who’s dad made it big, but who has never actually done anything productive themselves make – simply based on capital investment alone – hundreds of thousands of dollars a year?[/quote]

Very well said, SDEngineer!

Can anyone name a socialist (not communist) country where everyone is paid exactly the same?

Wealth is relative. I don’t think anyone is saying we should all be paid the same amount, but wouldn’t society AND individuals benefit most if there wasn’t such a disparity in wealth.

The highest incomes are earned by people in the financial industry and corporate management. Does anyone really believe they **earn** the multiples they make, or could it be because they are at the top of the money pyramid, and they decide where the money goes? They answer to no one but themselves and thier inter-connected group of thieves. Don’t even give the the “shareholder” nonsense, because individual shareholders do not have a controlling majority; they are just along for the ride.

[CA renter]

[quote=SDEngineer]I have no doubt this is an urban legend.

One clue is that the professor presumably would have known the difference between socialism and communism. The example used in this class was strict communism.

Under most forms of socialism, there is still incentive to get ahead, and people are not treated exactly equally. A doctor, for example, still commands a premium wage over a ditchdigger. The difference is simply that the wage inequality which occurs under capitalism is kept somewhat in check (especially under most hybrid systems, which appear to be the most successful, which fuse elements of both capitalism and socialism together), and a minimum living standard (usually pretty low) is guaranteed to it’s citizens.

Does anyone here really think that, for example, a CEO actually should be paid 200-300x the average salary of his workers (which is roughly the current average)? Or a trust fund kiddy who’s dad made it big, but who has never actually done anything productive themselves make – simply based on capital investment alone – hundreds of thousands of dollars a year?[/quote]

Very well said, SDEngineer!

Can anyone name a socialist (not communist) country where everyone is paid exactly the same?

Wealth is relative. I don’t think anyone is saying we should all be paid the same amount, but wouldn’t society AND individuals benefit most if there wasn’t such a disparity in wealth.

The highest incomes are earned by people in the financial industry and corporate management. Does anyone really believe they **earn** the multiples they make, or could it be because they are at the top of the money pyramid, and they decide where the money goes? They answer to no one but themselves and thier inter-connected group of thieves. Don’t even give the the “shareholder” nonsense, because individual shareholders do not have a controlling majority; they are just along for the ride.

[CA renter]

[quote=SDEngineer]I have no doubt this is an urban legend.

One clue is that the professor presumably would have known the difference between socialism and communism. The example used in this class was strict communism.

Under most forms of socialism, there is still incentive to get ahead, and people are not treated exactly equally. A doctor, for example, still commands a premium wage over a ditchdigger. The difference is simply that the wage inequality which occurs under capitalism is kept somewhat in check (especially under most hybrid systems, which appear to be the most successful, which fuse elements of both capitalism and socialism together), and a minimum living standard (usually pretty low) is guaranteed to it’s citizens.

Does anyone here really think that, for example, a CEO actually should be paid 200-300x the average salary of his workers (which is roughly the current average)? Or a trust fund kiddy who’s dad made it big, but who has never actually done anything productive themselves make – simply based on capital investment alone – hundreds of thousands of dollars a year?[/quote]

Very well said, SDEngineer!

Can anyone name a socialist (not communist) country where everyone is paid exactly the same?

Wealth is relative. I don’t think anyone is saying we should all be paid the same amount, but wouldn’t society AND individuals benefit most if there wasn’t such a disparity in wealth.

The highest incomes are earned by people in the financial industry and corporate management. Does anyone really believe they **earn** the multiples they make, or could it be because they are at the top of the money pyramid, and they decide where the money goes? They answer to no one but themselves and thier inter-connected group of thieves. Don’t even give the the “shareholder” nonsense, because individual shareholders do not have a controlling majority; they are just along for the ride.

[CA renter]

[quote=SDEngineer]I have no doubt this is an urban legend.

One clue is that the professor presumably would have known the difference between socialism and communism. The example used in this class was strict communism.

Under most forms of socialism, there is still incentive to get ahead, and people are not treated exactly equally. A doctor, for example, still commands a premium wage over a ditchdigger. The difference is simply that the wage inequality which occurs under capitalism is kept somewhat in check (especially under most hybrid systems, which appear to be the most successful, which fuse elements of both capitalism and socialism together), and a minimum living standard (usually pretty low) is guaranteed to it’s citizens.

Does anyone here really think that, for example, a CEO actually should be paid 200-300x the average salary of his workers (which is roughly the current average)? Or a trust fund kiddy who’s dad made it big, but who has never actually done anything productive themselves make – simply based on capital investment alone – hundreds of thousands of dollars a year?[/quote]

Very well said, SDEngineer!

Can anyone name a socialist (not communist) country where everyone is paid exactly the same?

Wealth is relative. I don’t think anyone is saying we should all be paid the same amount, but wouldn’t society AND individuals benefit most if there wasn’t such a disparity in wealth.

The highest incomes are earned by people in the financial industry and corporate management. Does anyone really believe they **earn** the multiples they make, or could it be because they are at the top of the money pyramid, and they decide where the money goes? They answer to no one but themselves and thier inter-connected group of thieves. Don’t even give the the “shareholder” nonsense, because individual shareholders do not have a controlling majority; they are just along for the ride.

[CA renter]

[quote=SDEngineer]I have no doubt this is an urban legend.

One clue is that the professor presumably would have known the difference between socialism and communism. The example used in this class was strict communism.

Under most forms of socialism, there is still incentive to get ahead, and people are not treated exactly equally. A doctor, for example, still commands a premium wage over a ditchdigger. The difference is simply that the wage inequality which occurs under capitalism is kept somewhat in check (especially under most hybrid systems, which appear to be the most successful, which fuse elements of both capitalism and socialism together), and a minimum living standard (usually pretty low) is guaranteed to it’s citizens.

Does anyone here really think that, for example, a CEO actually should be paid 200-300x the average salary of his workers (which is roughly the current average)? Or a trust fund kiddy who’s dad made it big, but who has never actually done anything productive themselves make – simply based on capital investment alone – hundreds of thousands of dollars a year?[/quote]

Very well said, SDEngineer!

Can anyone name a socialist (not communist) country where everyone is paid exactly the same?

Wealth is relative. I don’t think anyone is saying we should all be paid the same amount, but wouldn’t society AND individuals benefit most if there wasn’t such a disparity in wealth.

The highest incomes are earned by people in the financial industry and corporate management. Does anyone really believe they **earn** the multiples they make, or could it be because they are at the top of the money pyramid, and they decide where the money goes? They answer to no one but themselves and thier inter-connected group of thieves. Don’t even give the the “shareholder” nonsense, because individual shareholders do not have a controlling majority; they are just along for the ride.

[34f3f3f]

This very probably neither true nor urban legend, but has all the markings of a parable or an allegorical tale. They are fun and sometimes powerful tools, but are easy to formulate. Given all that has happened recently in the reward system, it would be quite easy to reverse engineer this one so that the teacher is the socialist, and the students the capitalists. It would be equally effective.

[34f3f3f]

This very probably neither true nor urban legend, but has all the markings of a parable or an allegorical tale. They are fun and sometimes powerful tools, but are easy to formulate. Given all that has happened recently in the reward system, it would be quite easy to reverse engineer this one so that the teacher is the socialist, and the students the capitalists. It would be equally effective.

[34f3f3f]

This very probably neither true nor urban legend, but has all the markings of a parable or an allegorical tale. They are fun and sometimes powerful tools, but are easy to formulate. Given all that has happened recently in the reward system, it would be quite easy to reverse engineer this one so that the teacher is the socialist, and the students the capitalists. It would be equally effective.

[34f3f3f]

This very probably neither true nor urban legend, but has all the markings of a parable or an allegorical tale. They are fun and sometimes powerful tools, but are easy to formulate. Given all that has happened recently in the reward system, it would be quite easy to reverse engineer this one so that the teacher is the socialist, and the students the capitalists. It would be equally effective.

[34f3f3f]

This very probably neither true nor urban legend, but has all the markings of a parable or an allegorical tale. They are fun and sometimes powerful tools, but are easy to formulate. Given all that has happened recently in the reward system, it would be quite easy to reverse engineer this one so that the teacher is the socialist, and the students the capitalists. It would be equally effective.

[hugo]

I think what’s being overlooked is that we don’t really have competition in this country. There is no way the financial services companies would be able to hand out lavish bonuses if they were truly competing to provide the best services at the lowest cost. Too big to fail has failed. We now have a system where public money guarantees grand profits for our financial oligarchs. A brand of socialism for the few.

[hugo]

I think what’s being overlooked is that we don’t really have competition in this country. There is no way the financial services companies would be able to hand out lavish bonuses if they were truly competing to provide the best services at the lowest cost. Too big to fail has failed. We now have a system where public money guarantees grand profits for our financial oligarchs. A brand of socialism for the few.

[hugo]

I think what’s being overlooked is that we don’t really have competition in this country. There is no way the financial services companies would be able to hand out lavish bonuses if they were truly competing to provide the best services at the lowest cost. Too big to fail has failed. We now have a system where public money guarantees grand profits for our financial oligarchs. A brand of socialism for the few.

[hugo]

I think what’s being overlooked is that we don’t really have competition in this country. There is no way the financial services companies would be able to hand out lavish bonuses if they were truly competing to provide the best services at the lowest cost. Too big to fail has failed. We now have a system where public money guarantees grand profits for our financial oligarchs. A brand of socialism for the few.

[Author]

Posts