This analogy is so true!

[Sdaeriji]

If she had really been in such a predicament, the solution would be to provide more educational facilities and let charity do its work instead of taking my marks and giving it to her.

Okay, the father is the one who proposed the grades redistribution, because he thought he was cleverly making a point. Three pages of this thread have been dedicated to trying to impress upon people like you that that is not how socialism works.

i bought a car. The government is taxing me to buy a car for everyone but since I already have one I'm not eligible. .Like that?

No.

I have another one: that guy earns no money as he doesn't work. I earn money because I work on a farm. now, the government wants to tax me lots and tax him nothing. Even if I get equal treatment as him, it's still unfair as I lost more.

You probably don't want to use farmers in your example here.

[Natapoc]

Additionally it misrepresents capitalism and carries the false assumption that people who work harder make more money. This is sometimes true and often not.

Additionally it lacks all semblance of class analysis. See this girl and her friend started out equally in the story and her friend decided to play while she worked. This is opposed to reality where people start out with differences in initial wealth. The differences in opportunities depend not as much on who YOU are as who your parents are.

If you are a saudi prince you can work less then average but have far far more then the hardest working janitor in the world who works 20 hours a day.

Since you have no choice of where you are born and few choices of opportunity after that (did you pick your elementary school? How about your native language? Your neighbourhood?)

Again this is very different then in your analogy which assumes wealth=grades.

Grades are far more equal since everyone starts at the same point (well there are differences here two but significantly less then in the economy)

The solution to YOUR problem is inheritance tax, not income tax which is open to abuse.

Inheritance tax only goes into effect when someone dies. So it would not have all that much of an effect since rich parents tend to give their children a great advantage while they are still alive. And not just in money. Actually money is one of the least important things that rich parents give to their kids.

It is the social connections which allow the children of the wealthy to quickly get into the top jobs and have other benefits.

[Kalasparata]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

That still doesn't prove wealth redistribution in other cases right.

In the analogy given, the girl with a 2.0 probably doesn't need a job, to afford going to all those parties, her parents are probably rich enough to pay anyway,

The analogy is about as bad as it gets,

It speaks more to the ignorance of the father than anything else,

The father is not ignorant in the case of that particular girl, my dear sir:)

The keyword here being "particular". There are many different hypothetical cases.

The better analogy - though not as much fun for our capitalist friends - would be not giving up a point from her GPA but giving some of her time to tutor her friend.

And while doing that may make things "fairer" for the other girl, I don't see why it would be fair to deduct something from her to someone who deserves something. What she earned is hers to keep. Lets say: A boy failed his test as he didn't have enough time to study. Is it then fair to deduct marks from somebody else who ALSO deserves it?

You miss the point. By helping the other girl she isn't making it "fairer." It isn't a leveling process, as if there were only so many points of GPA available to all students. It isn't as if raising one person's GPA automatically lowered someone else's. She's helping her friend learn the material so she can earn a hire GPA by herself.

The correct analogy would be that the buying power of money earned is equivalent to the knowledge gained in studying. Grade Point Averages and bank account balances are only arbitrary quantifications. When you pay taxes you contribute some of your buying power to the government so that it can provide assistance to your fellow citizens who happen to be in need. The idea is not to make everyone the same but to raise up the people who have stumbled.

You miss the point of the whole analogy.....It saying that her friend didn't bother studing o she got low mars while she, who studied fard had to give some of her marks to her.

[Blitzkrenia]

If she had really been in such a predicament, the solution would be to provide more educational facilities and let charity do its work instead of taking my marks and giving it to her.

Okay, the father is the one who proposed the grades redistribution, because he thought he was cleverly making a point. Three pages of this thread have been dedicated to trying to impress upon people like you that that is not how socialism works.

i bought a car. The government is taxing me to buy a car for everyone but since I already have one I'm not eligible. .Like that?

No.

I have another one: that guy earns no money as he doesn't work. I earn money because I work on a farm. now, the government wants to tax me lots and tax him nothing. Even if I get equal treatment as him, it's still unfair as I lost more.

No. A unemployed worker wants to work, but he can't, and not because he is lazy.

[Blitzkrenia]

You miss the point of the whole analogy.....It saying that her friend didn't bother studing o she got low mars while she, who studied fard had to give some of her marks to her.

What?

[Blitzkrenia]

If she had really been in such a predicament, the solution would be to provide more educational facilities and let charity do its work instead of taking my marks and giving it to her.

Okay, the father is the one who proposed the grades redistribution, because he thought he was cleverly making a point. Three pages of this thread have been dedicated to trying to impress upon people like you that that is not how socialism works.

i bought a car. The government is taxing me to buy a car for everyone but since I already have one I'm not eligible. .Like that?

No.

I have another one: that guy earns no money as he doesn't work. I earn money because I work on a farm. now, the government wants to tax me lots and tax him nothing. Even if I get equal treatment as him, it's still unfair as I lost more.

You probably don't want to use farmers in your example here.

True: Farmers are often subsidized.

[Eternal Yerushalayim]

Additionally it misrepresents capitalism and carries the false assumption that people who work harder make more money. This is sometimes true and often not.

Additionally it lacks all semblance of class analysis. See this girl and her friend started out equally in the story and her friend decided to play while she worked. This is opposed to reality where people start out with differences in initial wealth. The differences in opportunities depend not as much on who YOU are as who your parents are.

If you are a saudi prince you can work less then average but have far far more then the hardest working janitor in the world who works 20 hours a day.

Since you have no choice of where you are born and few choices of opportunity after that (did you pick your elementary school? How about your native language? Your neighbourhood?)

Again this is very different then in your analogy which assumes wealth=grades.

Grades are far more equal since everyone starts at the same point (well there are differences here two but significantly less then in the economy)

The solution to YOUR problem is inheritance tax, not income tax which is open to abuse.

Inheritance tax only goes into effect when someone dies. So it would not have all that much of an effect since rich parents tend to give their children a great advantage while they are still alive. And not just in money. Actually money is one of the least important things that rich parents give to their kids.

It is the social connections which allow the children of the wealthy to quickly get into the top jobs and have other benefits.

As if that's going to work after they die...Plus, whoever wants to employ a freeloader is plain stupid.

[Albignano]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

That still doesn't prove wealth redistribution in other cases right.

In the analogy given, the girl with a 2.0 probably doesn't need a job, to afford going to all those parties, her parents are probably rich enough to pay anyway,

The analogy is about as bad as it gets,

It speaks more to the ignorance of the father than anything else,

The father is not ignorant in the case of that particular girl, my dear sir:)

The keyword here being "particular". There are many different hypothetical cases.

The better analogy - though not as much fun for our capitalist friends - would be not giving up a point from her GPA but giving some of her time to tutor her friend.

And while doing that may make things "fairer" for the other girl, I don't see why it would be fair to deduct something from her to someone who deserves something. What she earned is hers to keep. Lets say: A boy failed his test as he didn't have enough time to study. Is it then fair to deduct marks from somebody else who ALSO deserves it?

You miss the point. By helping the other girl she isn't making it "fairer." It isn't a leveling process, as if there were only so many points of GPA available to all students. It isn't as if raising one person's GPA automatically lowered someone else's. She's helping her friend learn the material so she can earn a hire GPA by herself.

The correct analogy would be that the buying power of money earned is equivalent to the knowledge gained in studying. Grade Point Averages and bank account balances are only arbitrary quantifications. When you pay taxes you contribute some of your buying power to the government so that it can provide assistance to your fellow citizens who happen to be in need. The idea is not to make everyone the same but to raise up the people who have stumbled.

You miss the point of the whole analogy.....It saying that her friend didn't bother studing o she got low mars while she, who studied fard had to give some of her marks to her.

Reast assured that everybody here GOT the point.

Only... it's wrong.

[Wilson Mills]

If she had really been in such a predicament, the solution would be to provide more educational facilities and let charity do its work instead of taking my marks and giving it to her.

Okay, the father is the one who proposed the grades redistribution, because he thought he was cleverly making a point. Three pages of this thread have been dedicated to trying to impress upon people like you that that is not how socialism works.

i bought a car. The government is taxing me to buy a car for everyone but since I already have one I'm not eligible. .Like that?

No.

I have another one: that guy earns no money as he doesn't work. I earn money because I work on a farm. now, the government wants to tax me lots and tax him nothing. Even if I get equal treatment as him, it's still unfair as I lost more.

You missed one little point...they tax you who works, to give to him who doesn't work.

Oh and BTW, I love how I keep reading in this thread about taxes being a contribution...I don't contribute a damn thing...my money is confiscated every year, not contributed.

[Kalasparata]

If she had really been in such a predicament, the solution would be to provide more educational facilities and let charity do its work instead of taking my marks and giving it to her.

Okay, the father is the one who proposed the grades redistribution, because he thought he was cleverly making a point. Three pages of this thread have been dedicated to trying to impress upon people like you that that is not how socialism works.

i bought a car. The government is taxing me to buy a car for everyone but since I already have one I'm not eligible. .Like that?

No.

I have another one: that guy earns no money as he doesn't work. I earn money because I work on a farm. now, the government wants to tax me lots and tax him nothing. Even if I get equal treatment as him, it's still unfair as I lost more.

No. A unemployed worker wants to work, but he can't, and not because he is lazy.

LMAO Yea and the sky is purple! What reality are you living in. A person on the dole is too lazy to work. That wasn't talking about pentions or anything of the sort!

[Sdaeriji]

You miss the point of the whole analogy.....It saying that her friend didn't bother studing o she got low mars while she, who studied fard had to give some of her marks to her.

No, we got the point. It's just wrong, is all.

[Eternal Yerushalayim]

Your deserving $200 doesn't mean that I don't deserve my $200.

[Sdaeriji]

You missed one little point...they tax you who works, to give to him who doesn't work.

Oh and BTW, I love how I keep reading in this thread about taxes being a contribution...I don't contribute a damn thing...my money is confiscated every year, not contributed.

No, they tax me who works to give to me if I ever don't work.

Do you believe that there are actually people out there who live an actual, enjoyable life without ever working a single day?

[Kalasparata]

You miss the point of the whole analogy.....It saying that her friend didn't bother studing o she got low mars while she, who studied fard had to give some of her marks to her.

No, we got the point. It's just wrong, is all.

Your wrong!

[Buffett and Colbert]

I love you, NSG.

[Blitzkrenia]

If she had really been in such a predicament, the solution would be to provide more educational facilities and let charity do its work instead of taking my marks and giving it to her.

Okay, the father is the one who proposed the grades redistribution, because he thought he was cleverly making a point. Three pages of this thread have been dedicated to trying to impress upon people like you that that is not how socialism works.

i bought a car. The government is taxing me to buy a car for everyone but since I already have one I'm not eligible. .Like that?

No.

I have another one: that guy earns no money as he doesn't work. I earn money because I work on a farm. now, the government wants to tax me lots and tax him nothing. Even if I get equal treatment as him, it's still unfair as I lost more.

No. A unemployed worker wants to work, but he can't, and not because he is lazy.

LMAO Yea and the sky is purple! What reality are you living in. A person on the dole is too lazy to work. That wasn't talking about pentions or anything of the sort!

In this reality. You, on the other hand...

[Sdaeriji]

You miss the point of the whole analogy.....It saying that her friend didn't bother studing o she got low mars while she, who studied fard had to give some of her marks to her.

No, we got the point. It's just wrong, is all.

Your wrong!

See my comment re: your contribution to this thread.

[Albignano]

If she had really been in such a predicament, the solution would be to provide more educational facilities and let charity do its work instead of taking my marks and giving it to her.

Okay, the father is the one who proposed the grades redistribution, because he thought he was cleverly making a point. Three pages of this thread have been dedicated to trying to impress upon people like you that that is not how socialism works.

i bought a car. The government is taxing me to buy a car for everyone but since I already have one I'm not eligible. .Like that?

No.

I have another one: that guy earns no money as he doesn't work. I earn money because I work on a farm. now, the government wants to tax me lots and tax him nothing. Even if I get equal treatment as him, it's still unfair as I lost more.

No. A unemployed worker wants to work, but he can't, and not because he is lazy.

LMAO Yea and the sky is purple! What reality are you living in. A person on the dole is too lazy to work. That wasn't talking about pentions or anything of the sort!

Ok, I'm currently unemployed and I'd like you to come here and find a VERY quick solution.

By the way... are YOU working?

[Natapoc]

Additionally it misrepresents capitalism and carries the false assumption that people who work harder make more money. This is sometimes true and often not.

Additionally it lacks all semblance of class analysis. See this girl and her friend started out equally in the story and her friend decided to play while she worked. This is opposed to reality where people start out with differences in initial wealth. The differences in opportunities depend not as much on who YOU are as who your parents are.

If you are a saudi prince you can work less then average but have far far more then the hardest working janitor in the world who works 20 hours a day.

Since you have no choice of where you are born and few choices of opportunity after that (did you pick your elementary school? How about your native language? Your neighbourhood?)

Again this is very different then in your analogy which assumes wealth=grades.

Grades are far more equal since everyone starts at the same point (well there are differences here two but significantly less then in the economy)

The solution to YOUR problem is inheritance tax, not income tax which is open to abuse.

Inheritance tax only goes into effect when someone dies. So it would not have all that much of an effect since rich parents tend to give their children a great advantage while they are still alive. And not just in money. Actually money is one of the least important things that rich parents give to their kids.

It is the social connections which allow the children of the wealthy to quickly get into the top jobs and have other benefits.

As if that's going to work after they die...Plus, whoever wants to employ a freeloader is plain stupid.

I'd like to introduce you to my good friends: The American citizens the people who voted for president goerge w bush: Free loader extraordinary.

[Barringtonia]

Do you believe that there are actually people out there who live an actual, enjoyable life without ever working a single day?

Some of them even become president actually,

[Blitzkrenia]

I love you, NSG.

We love you too.

[Sdaeriji]

Do you believe that there are actually people out there who live an actual, enjoyable life without ever working a single day?

Some of them even become president actually,

Kind of my point. The only people who actually do that are the incredibly wealthy, not the incredibly poor.

[Eternal Yerushalayim]

If she had really been in such a predicament, the solution would be to provide more educational facilities and let charity do its work instead of taking my marks and giving it to her.

Okay, the father is the one who proposed the grades redistribution, because he thought he was cleverly making a point. Three pages of this thread have been dedicated to trying to impress upon people like you that that is not how socialism works.

i bought a car. The government is taxing me to buy a car for everyone but since I already have one I'm not eligible. .Like that?

No.

I have another one: that guy earns no money as he doesn't work. I earn money because I work on a farm. now, the government wants to tax me lots and tax him nothing. Even if I get equal treatment as him, it's still unfair as I lost more.

No. A unemployed worker wants to work, but he can't, and not because he is lazy.

LMAO Yea and the sky is purple! What reality are you living in. A person on the dole is too lazy to work. That wasn't talking about pentions or anything of the sort!

Ok, I'm currently unemployed and I'd like you to come here and find a VERY quick solution.

Prove to them that you deserve the job more than the other millions of people:)

[South Norwega]

LMAO Yea and the sky is purple! What reality are you living in. A person on the dole is too lazy to work. That wasn't talking about pentions or anything of the sort!

Oh Bullcrap.

What do you know, of economics and politics?

The majority of people, not everyone, but the majority of people on welfare would like to get off welfare, but the can't get jobs. That's the way it works. The majority of unemployed workers are generally between jobs, rather than lounging around on the dole.

[Farnhamia]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

That still doesn't prove wealth redistribution in other cases right.

In the analogy given, the girl with a 2.0 probably doesn't need a job, to afford going to all those parties, her parents are probably rich enough to pay anyway,

The analogy is about as bad as it gets,

It speaks more to the ignorance of the father than anything else,

The father is not ignorant in the case of that particular girl, my dear sir:)

The keyword here being "particular". There are many different hypothetical cases.

The better analogy - though not as much fun for our capitalist friends - would be not giving up a point from her GPA but giving some of her time to tutor her friend.

And while doing that may make things "fairer" for the other girl, I don't see why it would be fair to deduct something from her to someone who deserves something. What she earned is hers to keep. Lets say: A boy failed his test as he didn't have enough time to study. Is it then fair to deduct marks from somebody else who ALSO deserves it?

You miss the point. By helping the other girl she isn't making it "fairer." It isn't a leveling process, as if there were only so many points of GPA available to all students. It isn't as if raising one person's GPA automatically lowered someone else's. She's helping her friend learn the material so she can earn a hire GPA by herself.

The correct analogy would be that the buying power of money earned is equivalent to the knowledge gained in studying. Grade Point Averages and bank account balances are only arbitrary quantifications. When you pay taxes you contribute some of your buying power to the government so that it can provide assistance to your fellow citizens who happen to be in need. The idea is not to make everyone the same but to raise up the people who have stumbled.

You miss the point of the whole analogy.....It saying that her friend didn't bother studying so she got low marks while she, who studied hard had to give some of her marks to her.

Which is why the analogy fails, because it does not equate like to like. Poor people, people who need assistance, are some of the hardest working people you'll find. They simply, through circumstances like loss of a job or injury or family emergencies, need assistance. They do not refuse to work (in fact, in order to collect welfare in this country, they cannot refuse to work). And again, public assistance programs are not aimed at simply giving people money so that everyone has the same amount. They are aimed at helping people feed their families, care for their sick, look for a job in times of need.