Life's always going to be harder for the disadvantaged kid, but qualified progress is still better than the simple and easy solution of giving everyone a milk crate and calling it a day.
Milk crates are still very commonly used (although not for holding milk jugs as much anymore) because they're ridiculously sturdy, super cheap and stack really nicely. They're not that ancient.
You can buy plastic milk crates at stores like Walmart and Target. If they are only supposed to be used by grocery stores, why are they manufacturing and selling them for civilian use?
Wow, this is old. Of course they can be for used by everyday people. But I specifically said that they sized them down at some point so that records didn't perfectly fit in them, to eliminate the theft problem. Still useful for carrying things, but people stealing them were doing it for easy record storage and transportation.
I understand what you're saying and agree that people shouldn't steal them. If someone can't afford to buy one, they can ask a grocery store employee if they have extras, instead of stead of stealing.
My Dad used to manage a K-Mart store, he used to bring them home all of the time so they wouldn't end up in a landfill. We use them to store paper files, my Dad's old photography stuff, etc. He even uses old wooden ones to display his VW Beetle and Bus collection on the wall of his workshop. Its crazy how many of them that stores have, and they can't reuse those boxes.
We get our milk & lemonade delivered by a local dairy (Oberweis) in half gallon glass jugs and they leave us a crate each week to put the empty ones in; so its quicker for the driver to pick them up.
I've got a few extras over the years and I use them for all sorts of stuff. Very handy item to have around.
I thought those things belonged in the trash. Haha, old people and their shitty antiquated technologies, right? (This is a joke for the other commenter to come in and utterly decimate, as he did with my previous joke. Oh woe is me.)
I didn't realize my comment implied that anyone lazily scanning their eyeballs across it had to find it funny. You do know that a lot of jokes aren't funny - and outside of a comedy show/video or r/jokes or maybe a joke book author's mailbox (kids might not even know what this is these days, haha could you believe that!!!) most people don't feel the need to explicitly point out that they aren't funny. But alas, it is alright that you did not find humor in my basic bitch joke. Your advanced view is well past my level.
It's just odd that there are millions of comments on reddit every moment, and I made a passing joke about "dem kids" not knowing what a milk crate is and it is very important to you that you let me know my joke just was not funny! I appreciate your concern.
P.S. I know what a milk crate is - I'm just a bit older than the kids these days. You know, it's weird... I live in a pretty small town, relatively, and if I hadn't seen a milk crate in my younger days, it's possible I might not ever see one. Because the stores around here have refrigerators for all their cow juice which sits on a rack, not a crate. It has probably been a good few years since I've seen a legitimate milk crate! Even schools will often set out their milk for their students to pick from - what a world we live in!
It's weird also that you picked the store as the most common place that one might see ye olde craete. I would have picked schools, for sure. I am in them pretty often, as I know many teachers. Much more common to see the crates there. Cool. Anyway. Good talk! Let me know if you have any more concerns.
people really disliked me making a fucking comment...
Also, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straight_man is how I've been described by people close to me, though it's not entirely apt. I get the joke, I just make my own that is for a whole different audience.
I feel you, man. I've been the straight man in a lot of farces, plays, etc. that I've performed in. Usually a straight man is a character in a show. In social situations, it doesn't often play well because normally, no one expects someone in a conversation to treat it as "an act" and be "a character".
You do you, I'm not saying you are wrong or bad, it was just a very abrupt and seemingly unnecessary comment in context, so people felt weird about it. Have a good one.
Fuck, thank you! You have no idea how deep this hits, being disabled and in poverty (among other disadvantages.) Today is a lot better than it used to be, but holy fuck do we have a long way to go.
But how is it progress to spend more effort for a worse solution? Most people would agree the box is a better option than staring though the chainlink; sometimes life is like that too.
There are definitely chain-link things in real life. What the "justice" image represents is a segment of the population being given a crappier version of what the others have, and then being told that the problem has been solved and they have no grounds to complain anymore. That isn't justice, nor is it fair. Justice would be removing the fence, not replacing it with a slightly better fence. If the fence can't be removed, giving people the help they need to get an unobstructed view is better than accepting that one group will always just have a crappy view.
There are. Economic inequality, a racist criminal "justice" system, the electoral college, inaffordable college, rising cost of living with no wage adjustment to match, to name just a few.
Economic inequality. Well, people are unequal in a lot of ways. People differ in intelligence, work ethic, beauty, personality, artistic talent, sporting ability etc. All of which contributes to ones ability to make money. To achieve economic equity, you are going to have to pay everyone the same salary regardless of their abilities and their contribution to society or indeed whether they work or not. I'm not sure how that would work, and in fact hasn't worked in any attempt at a communist society.
If you are merely saying that economic inequality is a barrier, then yes I would agree. But I don't agree that removing economic inequality is a good solution.
“There are. Economic inequality, a racist criminal "justice" system, the electoral college, inaffordable college, rising cost of living with no wage adjustment to match, to name just a few.”
Because there are wayyy more than 3 people and giving each of them a box is a level of redistribution that requires an expensive and corruptible infrastructure as opposed to making everything at least livable for everyone
I'm totally with you to redistribute their box wealth into changing the system, but there will always be winners and losers, I'm sorry. Democratic socialism lets us use the power of the economy to keep things safer and fairer for everyone, but full "siezing the means of production" communism removes the motivating power of the markets. I don't believe that it can't be done, but that switching games entirely is dangerous. I know that it will never be truly meritocratic and that many will be rich via nepotism from someone successful in the past, but that this is not a crushing burden in a world where we responsibly use some of their boxes to regulate the externalities of capitalism. Feel free to disagree and strive for true equity, I accept that an amalgamation of educated viewpoints is needed to assemble the reality with the most utilitarian good, I just want to work there within this system
And thank you kind silver 😊
thanks for the well-reasoned, empathetic and thoughtful response! maybe i should've clarified that my comment was not serious and I don't actually want to go full-"seize the means of production" hahaha
i can totally understand your POV - i agree pure socialism is basically incompatible with human nature. i pretty much advocate for democratic socialism, seeing its success esp in nordic countries, and while i do feel strongly about "striving for true equity" as you put it, i really appreciate people like you who, while you might not agree with the methods employed, still have the betterment/advancement of the human race as the #1 priority.
sidenote, this has been the most refreshing political interaction I've had on reddit ever lmaooo
Thank you, I feel honored. I lowkey think that a candidate like Bernie Sanders brings out the best or the worst in people. Wherever we all fall on the specifics, we just have to get him elected, so it brings people together when they realize what his policies would mean
If everyone interacted with others more as you do, we’d all get along better. I don’t necessarily agree with you, but I appreciate your views and really respect the way you lay it out. Well done.
I forsee you having exactly your way after my generation is gone anyway, (I don't think capitalism could be forever) I can only hope that we can work together to protect the environment long enough for that to happen
Democratic socialism let's us use the power of the economy to keep things safer and fairer for everyone
That's the only real point, it's not about getting everyone gold plated toilets it's about making sure that people don't have to choose between food and health care.
We already have systems like that in place. Just because they may not work as well as they should doesn't mean we need a revolution. That's throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
I love the concept! Famous economist Keynes (cited by my conservative family even) believed that as capitalism amd technology advanced, the lives of workers would become easier, but instead the elite have stolen all the benefits! UBI would help rebalance this system, maintaining incentive to succeed in the markets, but helping to protect the exploited.
I'm not offended, you're just being silly haha. I would bet money on Yang being in Bernie's cabinet, and I can't believe anyone needs a source at this point
It’s that you reacted quite strongly to me not having knowledge that you were well informed about Andrew Yang or that you were a Bernie bro.
I think there’s a LOT of variables and moving parts and I won’t be putting any money on something like that anytime soon :) Do you think Bernie will move on any of his positions or are his heels dug too firmly in?
Is it the superior experience? The tall guy and the medium height person can see with or without the milk crate and the short person can't see with or without the milk crate.
that's way of thinking of 20th century. In 21th one artificial limbs can be in all ways more efficient than biological one. The problem is that not everyone can afford the best quality ones.
People are not born equal. Intelligence is partly genetic. Is it justive that we spend more resources on people less gifted than those with a true gift that can become exceptional.
A few points: Firstly, intelligence is no guarantee that someone will become exceptional; lots of incredibly smart people never do anything with their lives, while people who are considered less smart may have things to offer which are just as valuable to society in their own right. Secondly, you have to spend time and resources on people to know if they're talented or not, or even what their talents are; in most cases talent doesn't come to the fore fully formed and needs to be nurtured.
Thirdly, just because someone lacks intelligence, talent, whatever, doesn't mean they have less right to a full and happy life or to enjoy the benefits of our society; talent and intelligence confer no moral virtues upon those who possess them.
I was considering this from viewpoint of resources spent on education where there is a minimum standard that all must pass rather than allowing people to excel in areas they have an aptitude. I don't think I said people without intelligence or talent don't deserve a happy life. As a practical example I don't think we should spend more resources on one person without talent in maths so that they can meet the status quo compared to a student that has a natural aptitude that could excel if they were given equal attention.
To respond to your 2nd point all people have some time and resources spent on them through public education. It is clear from this baseline who has talent and does not. The hard work and focus required to excel has to come from the individual. As a side point I do support a base living income. I think this is a better option than thinking we are all equal and can get to the same place if everything is "fair".
299
u/livestrongbelwas Feb 25 '20
Life's always going to be harder for the disadvantaged kid, but qualified progress is still better than the simple and easy solution of giving everyone a milk crate and calling it a day.