|
Oligarchy; Small Groups of Multi Millionaires Funding Super Pacs
|
|
Topic Started: Feb 25 2012, 11:04 PM (1,875 Views)
|
|
Mountainrivers
|
Feb 26 2012, 10:32 PM
Post #41
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- Stoney
- Feb 26 2012, 10:29 PM
- Quote:
-
Social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality and involves a greater degree of economic egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution. These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear in a procedurally just system. The Constitution of the International Labour Organization affirms that "universal and lasting peace can be established only if it is based upon social justice."[4] Furthermore, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action treats social justice as a purpose of the human rights education. WikipediaThat's the same things that Marx and Engels talked about, equal results instead of equal opportunity. Its still socialism/communism. "These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear in a procedurally just system."
What do you disagree with in that sentence?
|
|
|
| |
|
Stoney
|
Feb 26 2012, 10:35 PM
Post #42
|
- Posts:
- 1,722
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #47
- Joined:
- Apr 19, 2008
|
- Mountainrivers
- Feb 26 2012, 10:32 PM
- Stoney
- Feb 26 2012, 10:29 PM
- Quote:
-
Social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality and involves a greater degree of economic egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution. These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear in a procedurally just system. The Constitution of the International Labour Organization affirms that "universal and lasting peace can be established only if it is based upon social justice."[4] Furthermore, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action treats social justice as a purpose of the human rights education. WikipediaThat's the same things that Marx and Engels talked about, equal results instead of equal opportunity. Its still socialism/communism.
"These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear in a procedurally just system." What do you disagree with in that sentence? Aiming is always well intended. When government intervenes it always intervenes on the behalf of some and at the expense of others. Government cannot enhance equal opportunity. It can only diminish it. What it does for some it must take from others.
i
|
|
|
| |
|
Chris
|
Feb 26 2012, 11:23 PM
Post #43
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 10,097
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #230
- Joined:
- Oct 17, 2011
|
- Mountainrivers
- Feb 26 2012, 10:00 PM
- Stoney
- Feb 26 2012, 09:47 PM
Socialism/communism only works in the minds of those who have ignored history and ignore human nature, or don't understand either.
Why do you guys keep bringing up socialism/communism? No one is suggesting either. What do you call what you advocate?
Whatever you call it, we call it socialism. Just as facsim, nazism, communism, social democracy, progressivism, modern liberalism are all branched of socialism, failed socialism, I might add, so is what you and brewster and others day in and day out advocate.
Don't get hung up on the word. Pay attention to what people mean.
|
|
|
| |
|
Mountainrivers
|
Feb 26 2012, 11:24 PM
Post #44
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- Stoney
- Feb 26 2012, 10:35 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Feb 26 2012, 10:32 PM
- Stoney
- Feb 26 2012, 10:29 PM
- Quote:
-
Social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality and involves a greater degree of economic egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution. These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear in a procedurally just system. The Constitution of the International Labour Organization affirms that "universal and lasting peace can be established only if it is based upon social justice."[4] Furthermore, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action treats social justice as a purpose of the human rights education. WikipediaThat's the same things that Marx and Engels talked about, equal results instead of equal opportunity. Its still socialism/communism.
"These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear in a procedurally just system." What do you disagree with in that sentence?
Aiming is always well intended. When government intervenes it always intervenes on the behalf of some and at the expense of others. Government cannot enhance equal opportunity. It can only diminish it. What it does for some it must take from others. i Do you only see the world in black and white? No in-betweens? When government does things, it usually benefits more people than it hurts.
|
|
|
| |
|
Mountainrivers
|
Feb 26 2012, 11:26 PM
Post #45
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- Chris
- Feb 26 2012, 11:23 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Feb 26 2012, 10:00 PM
- Stoney
- Feb 26 2012, 09:47 PM
Socialism/communism only works in the minds of those who have ignored history and ignore human nature, or don't understand either.
Why do you guys keep bringing up socialism/communism? No one is suggesting either.
What do you call what you advocate? Whatever you call it, we call it socialism. Just as facsim, nazism, communism, social democracy, progressivism, modern liberalism are all branched of socialism, failed socialism, I might add, so is what you and brewster and others day in and day out advocate. Don't get hung up on the word. Pay attention to what people mean. Good advice, Chris. Pay attention to what people mean. If you can't read my mind, then you have no idea what I mean as long as you are so wrapped up in your own definitions, which are easily debunked by looking them up in a dictionary.
|
|
|
| |
|
Chris
|
Feb 26 2012, 11:27 PM
Post #46
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 10,097
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #230
- Joined:
- Oct 17, 2011
|
"These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more (A) equality of opportunity than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture (B) equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear in a procedurally just system."
(A) is right wing, classical liberalism, conservatism and libertarianism. (B) is left wing, modern liberalism and socialism.
(A) is found in the Declaration and Constitution. (B) is not.
|
|
|
| |
|
Mountainrivers
|
Feb 26 2012, 11:30 PM
Post #47
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 33,547
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #34
- Joined:
- Mar 24, 2008
|
- Chris
- Feb 26 2012, 11:27 PM
"These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more (A) equality of opportunity than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture (B) equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear in a procedurally just system."
(A) is right wing, classical liberalism, conservatism and libertarianism. (B) is left wing, modern liberalism and socialism.
(A) is found in the Declaration and Constitution. (B) is not. Lots of things aren't found in the constitution. I don't put a lot of faith in that argument.
|
|
|
| |
|
Chris
|
Feb 26 2012, 11:30 PM
Post #48
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 10,097
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #230
- Joined:
- Oct 17, 2011
|
- Mountainrivers
- Feb 26 2012, 11:26 PM
- Chris
- Feb 26 2012, 11:23 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Feb 26 2012, 10:00 PM
- Stoney
- Feb 26 2012, 09:47 PM
Socialism/communism only works in the minds of those who have ignored history and ignore human nature, or don't understand either.
Why do you guys keep bringing up socialism/communism? No one is suggesting either.
What do you call what you advocate? Whatever you call it, we call it socialism. Just as facsim, nazism, communism, social democracy, progressivism, modern liberalism are all branched of socialism, failed socialism, I might add, so is what you and brewster and others day in and day out advocate. Don't get hung up on the word. Pay attention to what people mean.
Good advice, Chris. Pay attention to what people mean. If you can't read my mind, then you have no idea what I mean as long as you are so wrapped up in your own definitions, which are easily debunked by looking them up in a dictionary. It's not about reading minds, rivers, it's about the context of other words and their meanings that establish the meaning of any one word.
Simple example:
* I'm going down to the bank to swim. * I'm going down to the bank to deposit.
No mind reading required.
|
|
|
| |
|
Chris
|
Feb 26 2012, 11:30 PM
Post #49
|
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
- Posts:
- 10,097
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #230
- Joined:
- Oct 17, 2011
|
- Mountainrivers
- Feb 26 2012, 11:30 PM
- Chris
- Feb 26 2012, 11:27 PM
"These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more (A) equality of opportunity than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture (B) equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear in a procedurally just system."
(A) is right wing, classical liberalism, conservatism and libertarianism. (B) is left wing, modern liberalism and socialism.
(A) is found in the Declaration and Constitution. (B) is not.
Lots of things aren't found in the constitution. I don't put a lot of faith in that argument. And that is (B) as well.
Now we can for a time call it (A) and (B) without all the connotations people perceive.
Edited by Chris, Feb 26 2012, 11:31 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
Stoney
|
Feb 26 2012, 11:32 PM
Post #50
|
- Posts:
- 1,722
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #47
- Joined:
- Apr 19, 2008
|
- Mountainrivers
- Feb 26 2012, 11:24 PM
- Stoney
- Feb 26 2012, 10:35 PM
- Mountainrivers
- Feb 26 2012, 10:32 PM
- Stoney
- Feb 26 2012, 10:29 PM
- Quote:
-
Social justice is based on the concepts of human rights and equality and involves a greater degree of economic egalitarianism through progressive taxation, income redistribution, or even property redistribution. These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear in a procedurally just system. The Constitution of the International Labour Organization affirms that "universal and lasting peace can be established only if it is based upon social justice."[4] Furthermore, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action treats social justice as a purpose of the human rights education. WikipediaThat's the same things that Marx and Engels talked about, equal results instead of equal opportunity. Its still socialism/communism.
"These policies aim to achieve what developmental economists refer to as more equality of opportunity than may currently exist in some societies, and to manufacture equality of outcome in cases where incidental inequalities appear in a procedurally just system." What do you disagree with in that sentence?
Aiming is always well intended. When government intervenes it always intervenes on the behalf of some and at the expense of others. Government cannot enhance equal opportunity. It can only diminish it. What it does for some it must take from others. i
Do you only see the world in black and white? No in-betweens? When government does things, it usually benefits more people than it hurts. Equal outcome and equal opportunity are black and white. There is no in between. One precludes the other.
|
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|