equality isn't fair

[SmokeyDan]

There have been a lot of threads lately about equality.

It got me thinking.

Equality isn't fair. Some of us are more talented than others. Some of us work harder than others. And sometimes those people came before us and decided to bless their progeny with the advantages their success can afford.

Some of us are better golfers. Should everyone on the PGA make as much as Tiger Woods?

How unfair would it be if equality were forced upon us?

I tell you this, we wouldn't be equal in bliss, but equal in misery if this came to pass. It is the only way equity has ever been proliferated.

 

[ChesusRice]

Just read atLas shrugged?

 

[NoDrama]

Just read atLas shrugged?

If the word “equality” is to be taken in any serious or rational sense, the crusade for this belief is dated by about a century or more: the United States of America has made it an anachronism—by establishing a system based on the principle of individual rights. “Equality,” in a human context, is a political term: it means equality before the law, the equality of fundamental, inalienable rights which every man possesses by virtue of his birth as a human being, and which may not be infringed or abrogated by man-made institutions, such as titles of nobility or the division of men into castes established by law, with special privileges granted to some and denied to others. The rise of capitalism swept away all castes, including the institutions of aristocracy and of slavery or serfdom.
But this is not the meaning that the altruists ascribe to the word “equality.”

They turn the word into an anti-concept: they use it to mean, not political, but metaphysical equality—the equality of personal attributes and virtues, regardless of natural endowment or individual choice, performance and character. It is not man-made institutions, but nature, i.e., reality, that they propose to fight—by means of man-made institutions.

Since nature does not endow all men with equal beauty or equal intelligence, and the faculty of volition leads men to make different choices, the egalitarians propose to abolish the “unfairness” of nature and of volition, and to establish universal equality in fact—in defiance of facts. Since the Law of Identity is impervious to human manipulation, it is the Law of Causality that they struggle to abrogate. Since personal attributes or virtues cannot be “redistributed,” they seek to deprive men of their consequences—of the rewards, the benefits, the achievements created by personal attributes and virtues. It is not equality before the law that they seek, but inequality: the establishment of an inverted social pyramid, with a new aristocracy on top—the aristocracy of non-value.

-Ayn Rand

 

[ChesusRice]

Ayn Rand didn't believe in equality.
She was self centered bitch that only thought of herself.
And had no problems fucking over everyone else if it benefitted her

 

[budlover13]

Not everyone is equal in talent or potential, agreed.

'Fair' is the ONLY four letter "f" word that is not allowed in my home. Fairness is a great idea but it rarely exists in this 'modern' society. Too many people dwell on fairness imo.

 

[budlover13]

Not everyone is equal in talent or potential, agreed.

'Fair' is the ONLY four letter "f" word that is not allowed in my home. Fairness is a great idea but it rarely exists in this 'modern' society. Too many people dwell on fairness imo.

And REAL men and women do their best to be 'fair' in dealing with others.

 

[UncleBuck]

equality of outcome isn't fair.

equality of opportunity is supposedly what america was founded on, and is the more perfect union we keep striving for.

except for republicans and rawn pawl fanboiz, of course.

 

[SmokeyDan]

Just read atLas shrugged?

Believe it or not, I've never read that.

I've been reading Padawanbater2.

 

[Padawanbater2]

There have been a lot of threads lately about equality.

It got me thinking.

Equality isn't fair. Some of us are more talented than others. Some of us work harder than others. And sometimes those people came before us and decided to bless their progeny with the advantages their success can afford.

Some of us are better golfers. Should everyone on the PGA make as much as Tiger Woods?

How unfair would it be if equality were forced upon us?

I tell you this, we wouldn't be equal in bliss, but equal in misery if this came to pass. It is the only way equity has ever been proliferated.

Equality of opportunity, not results

Are you going to sit there with a straight face and argue it is unfair for Americans to want equal opportunities? If you are, can you explain why you believe that is unfair?

Ayn Rand didn't believe in equality.
She was self centered bitch that only thought of herself.
And had no problems fucking over everyone else if it benefitted her

Then used social security in her old age. Her own ideas bit her in the ass in the end

 

[Harrekin]

Equality of opportunity, not results

Are you going to sit there with a straight face and argue it is unfair for Americans to want equal opportunities? If you are, can you explain why you believe that is unfair?



Then used social security in her old age. Her own ideas bit her in the ass in the end

If you are paying into an insurance policy but have no intention of ever using it...why bother?

Therefore, if she was forced to pay into it, why not use it?

 

[Padawanbater2]

If you are paying into an insurance policy but have no intention of ever using it...why bother?

Therefore, if she was forced to pay into it, why not use it?

How does that negate the fact her entire career was built upon the idea of self sufficiency? She actively utilized a government program she spent decades fighting against. She is the definition of hypocrisy in action.

 

[Harrekin]

How does that negate the fact her entire career was built upon the idea of self sufficiency? She actively utilized a government program she spent decades fighting against. She is the definition of hypocrisy in action.

No, she was forced to participate in a system, so why should she not use the system she was forced to participate in?

In her idealistic world she wouldn't have claimed SS, however she wouldn't have been forced to participate in it either.

I don't even agree with the old slag but you're nitpicking the wrong parts.

 

[Padawanbater2]

No, she was forced to participate in a system, so why should she not use the system she was forced to participate in?

In her idealistic world she wouldn't have claimed SS, however she wouldn't have been forced to participate in it either.

I don't even agree with the old slag but you're nitpicking the wrong parts.

Nowhere in her ideology does it say "well I guess if you're forced to do it, do it.."

Her career was built on "no matter what, it's wrong", and she used the same assistance she spent decades fighting against.

 

[budlover13]

Nowhere in her ideology does it say "well I guess if you're forced to do it, do it.."

Her career was built on "no matter what, it's wrong", and she used the same assistance she spent decades fighting against.

You mean she reclaimed her money that had been taken through coercion/threat of force?

 

[spandy]

Equal opportunity, I could never argue against that.

Equal Life? Um, no. Gotta earn it if you want it, and even then there are no guarantees.

 

[SmokeyDan]

Equality of opportunity, not results

Are you going to sit there with a straight face and argue it is unfair for Americans to want equal opportunities? If you are, can you explain why you believe that is unfair?



Then used social security in her old age. Her own ideas bit her in the ass in the end

Equality of opportunities are in a way equality of results.

Can you somehow tell me how the son of a poor man has an equal opportunity to the son of a rich man if we don't somehow limit the rich fathers ability to boost his son?

 

[ChesusRice]

You mean she reclaimed her money that had been taken through coercion/threat of force?

Or she is just a hypocrite illegal immigrant

 

[budlover13]

Or she is just a hypocrite illegal immigrant

Had she not paid in, I could see calling her a hypocrite.

 

[SmokeyDan]

Or she is just a hypocrite illegal immigrant

That is a pretty pathetic attack on her.

If she had been allowed to not payin, then somehow signed up for SSI, then you would have a point.

Participation is involuntary, therefore it isn't hypocrisy for those opposed to the concept to utilize it.

It was sold to us as if our money would be put in a lock box just for us.

By your theory, those of us who are opposed to the income tax should burn our return checks.

It's not like she signed up for welfare.

 

[NoDrama]

Then used social security in her old age. Her own ideas bit her in the ass in the end

That SS account that you put money in every paycheck? Yeah, that belongs to you, it isn't government handouts or some government funded program.