People Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Who says I didn't go?
Just to be clear I'll repeat it, it's not about me, I am doing great, thank you.

---

Ok so let's say you did go. What is stopping Joe Blow from Kokomo from going too? Is it simply school size? If so what is your solution to that, FORCE MIT to accept anyone who applies?

Speaking of dodging questions you dodged mine. "Do you (or one so as we don't personalize it to ioan) need to go to MIT to be successful?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

But then what about you answer my questions instead of posting red herrings?
So can everyone go to the same top university which pretty much means they will get a well paid job afterwards? The answer is obvious, which is why you are dodging it.

---

Show me the law that says you must go to MIT to be a success. From personal experience I know plenty of people who did not go to such a school that are very successful, and plenty of people who went to those schools who are worthless.

Besides who ever said that sucess was tied to going to a "top school"? I sure haven't argued that.

You asked for a reason why inequality is the reason for the lack of mobility. In #1054

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

So those savings and investments are of no use to anyone?

---

In the context of an individual who has no savings, then yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Another reason that union membership has fallen is that people got wise to their scam. Why should I be a member of a union when all they do is take money out of my pocket with nothing to show for it.

---

Of course and I agree with you. 30-50 years ago it wasn't the case though. The unions did have more market power to negotiate on wages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

So who is FORCING someone to work for less than they desire?

---

The market price for labour.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

So we are somehow supposed to stop someone from falling behind? How do you propose we do that? If I take the inititive to get ahead, and do, and someone else doesn't take responsibility for themselves, and they fall behind, who's fault is that? Am I to be punished for someone else's lack of motivation?

---

How about a governmental policy of free education. It will take a longish view but in the long run the quality of the labour force will be improved. It's mainly the reason why Germany produces so many more highly technical manufactured goods and why they tend to be of better quality.
German built cars are easily better than anything America produces, German technical instruments are better... heck in 2010 Germany exported more than the US did and were second only behind China. What does that say about the German people?

As for the question of motivation, it's not necessarily an individual thing. Clearly its far bigger than that and society itself helps to shape those motivations. If someone "fell behind" then their children will start from a far worse position, if you then multiply than by about 80 million times, then you describe US society pretty well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Apparently you do not know what profit is. Profit is the money left over after you account of your expenses, overhead, wages, etc. So if your company is running a profit the net result is NOT zero.

---

One company is not THE ECONOMY. DUH.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Please point me to the economics text book that says it is a zero sum game.

---

How about YOU prove something for a change? I gave a pretty good definition of the concept and made an assertion, but you seem very timid to show your workings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

So let's get real about this and stop spending beyond our means.

---

Yay! Let old people die off because they can't eat! Soylent Green is your solution maybe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Ok so let's say you did go. What is stopping Joe Blow from Kokomo from going too? Is it simply school size? If so what is your solution to that, FORCE MIT to accept anyone who applies?

---

It looks like school size might be one problem, that the free market, which some think is the holly grail of humanity, will take care of that and only those who can afford it will have a chance to get there.
Looks like not everyone has equal chances after all, isn't it?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Speaking of dodging questions you dodged mine. "Do you (or one so as we don't personalize it to ioan) need to go to MIT to be successful?"

---

Depends what you define as successful.
Obviously people have been more or less successful without an MIT diploma, however the chances to be successful with such diploma are much higher then if you got a diploma from an unknown university.

It doesn't look like everyone can get the same education, in the same university and as such they won't have the same chances to be successful (definition pending), yet we are told that the chances are equal no matter if you are born rich or poor, or if you are born in Somalia or the US.
I wonder what percentage of people from Peru are successful compared to the percentage in Switzerland.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Show me the law that says you must go to MIT to be a success. From personal experience I know plenty of people who did not go to such a school that are very successful, and plenty of people who went to those schools who are worthless.

---

Let's not exaggerate, not sure how many people who studied at the MIT are worthless, but certainly not plenty, especially not from your personal experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Besides who ever said that sucess was tied to going to a "top school"? I sure haven't argued that.

---

Success has it's ways, majority of them goes through top quality education, some of it through hard work and chance.

If you mean that being successful with and without a TOP university diploma are equal then I am rather sure we are talking about different kinds of success.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

You asked for a reason why inequality is the reason for the lack of mobility. In #1054
In the context of an individual who has no savings, then yes.

---

You completly miss the point. Someone's savings/investments allow someone else to build/expand a business. Thus giving someone without savings a job. The basis of Capitalism is captial. Capital is the money that those evil rich people use to invest in business and pay people.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

The market price for labour.

---

So you have a choice. Work or don't work. If enough people don't take the job at a low wage, the wage will increase. Why do you think that janitors, garbage men, and septic tank pumpers make more than minimum wage?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

How about a governmental policy of free education. It will take a longish view but in the long run the quality of the labour force will be improved. It's mainly the reason why Germany produces so many more highly technical manufactured goods and why they tend to be of better quality.
German built cars are easily better than anything America produces, German technical instruments are better... heck in 2010 Germany exported more than the US did and were second only behind China. What does that say about the German people?

---

There are many issues that effect US exports, product quality, etc. than simply education.

And our government already borrows $0.40 of every $1 it spends, you suggest we up that by providing "free" education? And why would a "free" education change they dynamics in this country? You can already get an almost free education if you simply apply for loans, grants, and scholarships.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

As for the question of motivation, it's not necessarily an individual thing. Clearly its far bigger than that and society itself helps to shape those motivations. If someone "fell behind" then their children will start from a far worse position, if you then multiply than by about 80 million times, then you describe US society pretty well.

---

Why do you have this obsession with lumping everyone together? Do you have no concept of personal responsibility?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

One company is not THE ECONOMY. DUH.

---

So you are now suggesting that if one company makes profit that another must have a decreased profit?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

How about YOU prove something for a change? I gave a pretty good definition of the concept and made an assertion, but you seem very timid to show your workings.

---

What would you like me to prove? I'm not the one running around claiming there are all these problems that need fixing. Sorry but the burden of proof is on you. I feel I've been pretty responsive in stating why many of your "solutions" will not work, but if you feel that I have not fully answered something let me know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

Yay! Let old people die off because they can't eat! Soylent Green is your solution maybe?

---

When did I say that? Quite the opposite in fact. The government in the US has been doing that for years and years. They have promised that there will be Social Security money for people when they retire, yet they raid the trust fund to pay for their own pet projects causing the system to be on the verge of bankruptcy. What do you suppose will happen when Social Security finally collapses, and all those that have been promised it will be there find that they no longer have any money for retirement?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Why do you have this obsession with lumping everyone together? Do you have no concept of personal responsibility?

---

Can't answer for Rollo, but this highlights how these problems seem to be viewed differently:

1. There is no problem because an individual can progress[/*:m:rk4wt2c6]
2. There is a problem because in a global context inequality is increasing[/*:m:rk4wt2c6]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Can't answer for Rollo, but this highlights how these problems seem to be viewed differently:

1. There is no problem because an individual can progress[/*:m:1yhwd1jx]
2. There is a problem because in a global context inequality is increasing[/*:m:1yhwd1jx]

---

Do you not believe an individual can progress? If not, what is stopping them? If you do believe that an individual can progress, why can't a "group"? After all what is a group other than a collection of individuals?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

After all what is a group other than a collection of individuals?

---

A group is a collection of individuals who work together to achieve a common set of goals. A politcal movement for example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

A group is a collection of individuals who work together to achieve a common set of goals. A politcal movement for example.

---

Ok so you don't believe in individual responsibility then. Everyone must do things in a "group" or "movement". If you do not believe that an individual must do for himself first, that everything must be done in a group, then I don't think we have anything else to talk about. You can go on looking for your collective salvation, and I will continue to take care of myself first, then my friends and family, and those around me.

Have fun. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chuck34

Ok so you don't believe in individual responsibility then. Everyone must do things in a "group" or "movement".

---

You deduce that from what exactly :confused: (You're wrong)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

You deduce that from what exactly :confused: (You're wrong)

---

I deduced that from your cryptic non answer to my questions. You only want to talk about the group, never the individual because it sets your argument up to "win". So I'll ask again. If an individual can make progress, why can't another? Why can't the "group"?

Your original two choice "views" were typically too black and white. You want to make this about the "group" because if one does not do well, then you can claim that no one is doing well. That is a false choice. If one can do well, what is stopping others?