Harleyman Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 In which case the only way to do it is to adopt some sort of communist ideal. Otherwise parents who earn well will provide a good education for their children. They'll provide good nutrition and pay for sports clubs, they'll buy them books and so on. All of which won't be possible for the poor parent. The inheritance will be largely irrelevant by the time it comes, as the good start in life will have made the (now adult) child successful anyway. George Orwell got it exactly right. Revolutions topple the high and the mighty and then the new high and the mighty replace them. You cannot reduce everyone to a common denominator because none of us are the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 I am not sure precisely what the figures are in the UK but I know from reading elsewhere recently the top 1% in the United States own 40% of the countries wealth. In a nation as young as the USA that simply demonstrates the results of individual hard work and enterprise. More generally, surely you aren't suggesting that people shouldn't be allowed to look after their children? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael_W Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 Well no, we should surely adopt the ideal that all children should get good education, good nutrition, availability of sports, books etc. There is no ideal, just as there is no equality, some will thrive on books, some will thrive on sport, there are too many variables, health nor wealth does not guarantee anything....make the most of what you have and expect no one to give you anything ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael_W Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 That's the point though - inheritance is surely being given something. True but it should not be expected, even though in many cases it is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 Because privelege is not meritocratic. No, it's a fact and one I'll use to give my daughter the chance to earn as much money as possible so, in turn, she has the chance of a way better than average life. Think positive. Winners provide jobs for losers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 Look at Japan, look at the Nordic Countries. They haven't done so bad with much more equal pay than us. Look at South America, where there is huge income inequalities and look at their quality of life in contrast. In fact if you look at the metrics you will see societies where pay is more equal have better life expectancy, have less crime and are generally happier people. http://www.equalitytrust.org.uk/resources/slides Let's start with the stupidest part of that post. Oh, I can't decide on the stupidest part - it's all total crap. Comparing third world life expectancy to first world and blaming wage differentials for it. Drrrrrrrr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 For something to be done, the individuals that make up society have to agree to it. So that means that good for society needs to balance with good for the individuals. And this would be bad for pretty much every individual. And are generally sent to 're-education' camps if they don't when a left wing government gets power. I agree, a left wing state won't work if there are people around that want freedom to make as much cash as they can. The problem for the left is simple; there are always people around that want to better themselves so a left wing system is buggered before it even starts. You can redistribute wealth but there will always be one man who uses his cash to open a brewery and always another that will buy beer then complains he hasn't got as much money as the brewery owner who's exploiting him. When will the political left ever wake up and realise their daft ideas are a bag of rat droppings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted April 21, 2011 Share Posted April 21, 2011 We're all equal when they stick us 6 feet under Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted April 22, 2011 Author Share Posted April 22, 2011 Well no, we should surely adopt the ideal that all children should get good education, good nutrition, availability of sports, books etc. Sure, adopt whatever you like. It will still be the case that a parent with a lot of money will improve on that for their child, thus unlevelling the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael_W Posted April 22, 2011 Share Posted April 22, 2011 Striving to give 'people' equality has meant giving preferential treatment to some, how does that work ? Who judges equality, and how do they know what it is ? We will never be equal and there will never be a level playing field, many people will always strive to be better, some fairly and some unfairly...human nature ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.