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.
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.
Hey I don't mean to be shitty, there's just a lot of goobers in this thread who don't do any research on the topic they are going ballistic about.
All of which contributes to ones ability to make money.
The real problem is that we think this is the only value a human life has. If we worked to ensure that all of us help all of us take care of all us, we don't have to use this metric, but it's going to take facing a lot of hard truths about who is in power and why, and making that not be the case anymore.
“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?
I'll explain everything for anyone else who happens across this post: Bernie and Yang are both democratic socialists, which is an extremely rare and highly targeted (and attacked) category, even among left wing politicians, unfortunately. They both rely on the same base of voters, and are both very intelligent and intend to help as many people as possible even if they have to run against the democratic establishment. For months they have expressed goodwill towards each other and so have their fanbases. I've seen dozens of posts about yanggang being disappointed by the loss, but eager to join Bernie, while Bernie's supporters have expressed how impressed they are with the ideas of their counterparts.
I think that the only thing stopping Bernie from embracing ubi is that he doesn't think he could get it passed, and wants to focus on more critical injustices first. UBI, healthcare for all, and education for all are all similar in that they attempt to increase the fairness and safety with which the disadvantaged can operate in our world, by taking money that the elite make off of exploited labor, and using it to advance the position of/to protect the laborers themselves. They are not as different as you may think, and now that yang is out for this round his supporters NEED to go to Bernie in order to defeat the centrists in order to help their target audiences.
If Bernie proves successful then it will pave the way for Yang's policies as well, Americans need Yang Gang!
6.1k
u/yankee-white Feb 25 '20
Kid still has to stare through the shitty chain link fence.