ForumGarden

Good afternoon Bob, and welcome to ForumGarden. I'm pleased to have the opportunity to discuss with you the subject of egalitarianism and its application in American society.

I understand you take as your initial position that "being egalitarian does not mean guaranteed equal outcomes". I'd be interested to explore what you understand by "all willing to get ahead have the opportunity".

To what extent, for example, do you see birth as a moment when a significant statistical prediction can be made of a new US citizen's economic outcome? Is a child born equal in the US, or does the economic advantage or disadvantage of its family play a significant factor in the likelihood of its own educational and economic success?

Is a child born equal in the US, or does the economic advantage or disadvantage of its family play a significant factor in the likelihood of its own educational and economic success?


Yes, who you're the children of definitely makes a difference. Just ask the kid in the public school who's dodging bullets and the one who's father is a graduate of Harvard.

Everyone faces challenges in life, some are more financially equipped to overcome those challenges than others. There are way to few exceptions to this rule and it's getting worse.

Scrat;1351328 wrote: Yes, who you're the children of definitely makes a difference. Just ask the kid in the public school who's dodging bullets and the one who's father is a graduate of Harvard.

Everyone faces challenges in life, some are more financially equipped to overcome those challenges than others. There are way to few exceptions to this rule and it's getting worse.


Isn't this true pretty much everywhere?

YZGI;1351339 wrote: Isn't this true pretty much everywhere?


Yes it is and always has been, the difference is in europe we see it as one of the functions of government to take steps to address those inequities and challenge the notion that wealth means you have access to services and opportunities that are denied those who are poor or disadvantaged. There is a general consensus that wealth should not be concentrated in too few hands and the rich get richer while the poor get poorer. That's why you are starting to see people rioting on the streets, the ruling elite are taking the **** and everybody is beginning to get annoyed. If your parents are too poor to afford an educational opportunity for you or the monetary bar is kept artificially high the you have no choice in the matter, you remain part of the underclass.

Not saying we succeed of course or we have all the answers cos we don't.

Isn't this true pretty much everywhere?


It's been true since we lived in caves. Successful societies have ways of combating it and maintaining a balance. The Bolshevik revolution in Russia and what recently happened in Tunisia are what happens when the imbalance becomes too great to bear.

I think some notable exceptions do exist, Sweden and Norway for example. Countries like Belarus are not quite up to that standard but work reasonably well on their level. The key seems to be stability, with stability comes opportunity. Opportunity provides means for large amounts of people to make a living.

Historically people don't tolerate inequity the only thing different in the last hundred years is the ability of governments to control by force.

spot;1351323 wrote: Good afternoon Bob, and welcome to ForumGarden. I'm pleased to have the opportunity to discuss with you the subject of egalitarianism and its application in American society.

I understand you take as your initial position that "being egalitarian does not mean guaranteed equal outcomes". I'd be interested to explore what you understand by "all willing to get ahead have the opportunity".

To what extent, for example, do you see birth as a moment when a significant statistical prediction can be made of a new US citizen's economic outcome? Is a child born equal in the US, or does the economic advantage or disadvantage of its family play a significant factor in the likelihood of its own educational and economic success?


I understand you take as your initial position that "being egalitarian does not mean guaranteed equal outcomes". It's from the definition of egalitarian.

I'd be interested to explore what you understand by "all willing to get ahead have the opportunity".
Contrary to liberish dogma, America is not divided by race. Our social strata is defined by education and wealth and is easily crossed. We try, for the most part, to be a meritocracy. We are guaranteed equal rights by our Constitution. We are not guaranteed equal outcomes. In a meritocracy if you apply yourself in school, work hard, learn your chosen craft, and avoid the pitfalls of bad decisions along the way, you can aquire the means to afford the surroundings you desire.

Now, if you want to focus on the socialist/progressive left, you can watch this video to see what 50 years of uninterrupted socialism/progressivism can do to a city of 2 million people.

Socialism, capitalism, progressiism, communism, unionism, whatever "ism" you choose to rant about are merely tools of government and societies. Good tools if used properly.

The Soviet Union is a good example. After the fall of Berlin and the end of WWII European Russia was largely destroyed, entire cities were pounded to dust, the infrastructure was in ruins. Millions of homes were destroyed, agriculture was in tatters. 27 million people had died, 97% the generation of men born between 1923 and 1926 were dead.

Regardless, the system the government (highly centralized socialism) of the USSR set up in this mess worked. They got the starvation and disease under control, went largely from a total war production footing to what was needed for rebuilding. This was not a quick process, it took almost a decade. After Stalin died they began to build what was needed. Homes, huge apartment blocks in the cities, new factories, new infrastructure. Science progressed, Sputnik was launched, Yuri Gagarin was the first man in space. People had homes to live in, good medical care, education, the population stabilized.

We all know what happened in the 70s and 80s, when this tool was not put away. As we speak America is in a very similar situation. We've been using a tool for to long. The world has changed. Our form of government has not changed, just like in the Soviet Union. The parasites of this society, from the top to the bottom, left, right, up, down,in,out, rich or poor whatever label you want to put on them are sucking the life out of this country. People aren't going to have the means to provide for themselves if all the jobs are overseas. People with means aren't going to invest in a place when all they have to do is set back and collect interest.

You speak of equal opportunity and equal outcomes, in a system that all but ensures the children of the wealthy have unfettered access to the best this society has to offer. Sounds a lot like some third world countries I know. You speak of opportunity and outcomes when corporation and individuals can hide billions of dollars in tax shelters in the Caribbean while their country falls apart around them. You speak of equal opportunity when oil and drug company executives sit before congress are allowed to put the aims and goals of their masters above the very country they live in. If their masters live here at all.

You speak of opportunity and outcomes when the so called representatives of this nation are bought from day one by corporations and god knows who else. You spew righteous crap when a politician has to work day in and day out just to make enough money to pay the media corporations for air time in order to get their message out.

What people like you don't realize or refuse to see is we need another way of doing things. We need another set of tools to run this country. Either that or we may just end up like the USSR did. No country that doesn't value itself ever survives. Read a little history.

You and people like you are like stray dogs that have wandered into the territory of another pack. You're sitting in the sun totally consumed with licking your freaking privates and you don't even see the pack of dogs coming up the street to tear you to pieces.



Jeez. :-3

BaghdadBob;1351775 wrote: America is not divided by race. Our social strata is defined by education and wealth and is easily crossed. We try, for the most part, to be a meritocracy. We are guaranteed equal rights by our Constitution. We are not guaranteed equal outcomes. In a meritocracy if you apply yourself in school, work hard, learn your chosen craft, and avoid the pitfalls of bad decisions along the way, you can aquire the means to afford the surroundings you desire.:yh_clap :yh_clap

Scrat;1351811 wrote: Socialism, capitalism, progressiism, communism, unionism, whatever "ism" you choose to rant about are merely tools of government and societies. Good tools if used properly.

The Soviet Union is a good example. After the fall of Berlin and the end of WWII European Russia was largely destroyed, entire cities were pounded to dust, the infrastructure was in ruins. Millions of homes were destroyed, agriculture was in tatters. 27 million people had died, 97% the generation of men born between 1923 and 1926 were dead.

Regardless, the system the government (highly centralized socialism) of the USSR set up in this mess worked. They got the starvation and disease under control, went largely from a total war production footing to what was needed for rebuilding. This was not a quick process, it took almost a decade. After Stalin died they began to build what was needed. Homes, huge apartment blocks in the cities, new factories, new infrastructure. Science progressed, Sputnik was launched, Yuri Gagarin was the first man in space. People had homes to live in, good medical care, education, the population stabilized.

We all know what happened in the 70s and 80s, when this tool was not put away. As we speak America is in a very similar situation. We've been using a tool for to long. The world has changed. Our form of government has not changed, just like in the Soviet Union. The parasites of this society, from the top to the bottom, left, right, up, down,in,out, rich or poor whatever label you want to put on them are sucking the life out of this country. People aren't going to have the means to provide for themselves if all the jobs are overseas. People with means aren't going to invest in a place when all they have to do is set back and collect interest.

You speak of equal opportunity and equal outcomes, in a system that all but ensures the children of the wealthy have unfettered access to the best this society has to offer. Sounds a lot like some third world countries I know. You speak of opportunity and outcomes when corporation and individuals can hide billions of dollars in tax shelters in the Caribbean while their country falls apart around them. You speak of equal opportunity when oil and drug company executives sit before congress are allowed to put the aims and goals of their masters above the very country they live in. If their masters live here at all.

You speak of opportunity and outcomes when the so called representatives of this nation are bought from day one by corporations and god knows who else. You spew righteous crap when a politician has to work day in and day out just to make enough money to pay the media corporations for air time in order to get their message out.

What people like you don't realize or refuse to see is we need another way of doing things. We need another set of tools to run this country. Either that or we may just end up like the USSR did. No country that doesn't value itself ever survives. Read a little history.

You and people like you are like stray dogs that have wandered into the territory of another pack. You're sitting in the sun totally consumed with licking your freaking privates and you don't even see the pack of dogs coming up the street to tear you to pieces.



Jeez. :-3


Delightful rant but I want you to keep in mind one salient point: The progressives have had a legislative stranglehold on the US for nearly 80 years. The conservatives have never held a position to override a filibuster or veto in that time.

All of the social problems seen around you stem directly from liberal govt policy. Bad govt policy is the imbalance in society.

There's nothing you can point to as causation that progressive govt policy doesn't have its fingerprints on.

Govt's only domestic economic role should be to balance the power of business to consumer (anti-monopoly and laws guaranteeing equal opportunity) and environmental oversight.

Why not compare West Germany to East Germany after the war for us. Or, for that matter, any Iron Curtain country.

BaghdadBob;1351775 wrote: Contrary to liberish dogma, America is not divided by race.I've never suggested that America is divided by race. America is divided into the self-replicating wealthy and the disadvantaged poor by capitalism regardless of color.

Is a child born on equal terms with its cohort in the US, or does the economic advantage or disadvantage of its family play a significant factor in the likelihood of its own educational and economic success?

spot;1351832 wrote: I've never suggested that America is divided by race. America is divided into the self-replicating wealthy and the disadvantaged poor by capitalism regardless of color.

Is a child born on equal terms with its cohort in the US, or does the economic advantage or disadvantage of its family play a significant factor in the likelihood of its own educational and economic success?


1. You, like GMC, don't have a clue what goes on in the US.

2. I didn't imply that you commented on race. I was making a point that you may, or may not, be aware of. OK?



Is a child born on equal terms with its cohort in the US, or does the economic advantage or disadvantage of its family play a significant factor in the likelihood of its own educational and economic success?


Most like anyplace else on the planet, it has to do with parenting.

If it weren't for the unions & liberal progressive racist policy to deny kids in public schools a voucher system so that they could shop for better schooling, they'd be further ahead of where they are now.

Because kids are raised in the socialist soup of the inner-cities doesn't in any way hinder them from joining the capitalist rest of America tho, I have to admit, the progressives make it as difficult for them as possible.

BaghdadBob;1351835 wrote: Most like anyplace else on the planet, it has to do with parenting.

If it weren't for the unions & liberal progressive racist policy to deny kids in public schools a voucher system so that they could shop for better schooling, they'd be further ahead of where they are now.

Because kids are raised in the socialist soup of the inner-cities doesn't in any way hinder them from joining the capitalist rest of America tho, I have to admit, the progressives make it as difficult for them as possible.


I've consistently argued on FG in favor of school voucher systems every time they've been mentioned. Perhaps you don't think I'm liberal or progressive though.

Does the economic advantage or disadvantage of a child's family play a significant factor in the likelihood of its own educational and economic success?

One reason I ask is to find out whether you can give any adequate reason for the funding of schools out of taxation. If a child of wealthy parents is significantly more likely to encounter educational and economic success than the child of poor parents then your equal-start egalitarianism might argue for public schooling funded by taxation to level the terms. If there's no link then why is public schooling funded by taxation?

spot;1351840 wrote: If there's no link then why is public schooling funded by taxation?


Read some landmark SCOTUS case law like, Brown v Board of Education of Topeka, and Plyler v Doe.

K-12 tax payer funded education is a right under the 14 Amendment Equal Protection clause.

Does the economic advantage or disadvantage of a child's family play a significant factor in the likelihood of its own educational and economic success?


Only if the parents let it become an issue.

I've consistently argued on FG in favor of school voucher systems every time they've been mentioned.


Well, good for you! There's a glimmer of hope for you.

BaghdadBob;1351841 wrote: Read some landmark SCOTUS case law like, Brown v Board of Education of Topeka, and Plyler v Doe.

K-12 tax payer funded education is a right under the 14 Amendment Equal Protection clause.We are using "Why" in different senses. Do you consider the funding of schools out of taxation an aspect of equal-start egalitarianism for children or not? Your response to "If there's no link" suggests that you think there isn't a link between the funding of schools out of taxation and equal-start egalitarianism, that the link is purely legislative. Are you in favor of the funding of schools out of taxation or not, and why.

Posted by baghdad bob

1. You, like GMC, don't have a clue what goes on in the US.


I don't actually claim to know what goes on. I get involved in general discussion is someone makes a comparison to europe or the UK that is inaccurate. Like when someone suggests we are oppressed because we don't carry guns and we have a welfare state. We have a different view of what government is expected to do. It's a view based on our past history and a social change that america failed to make back in the fifties and sixties. Why you didn't is a peculiarly american phenomenon. If you like discussing things fine but stop feeling sorry for yourself and trying to convince yourself that everybody who is not american is worse off than you.

You suffer from the delusion that the american system is the best in the world. One of the best arguably but you notice no one is copying things like healthcare provision or is even the tiniest bit envious unless they are right wing nutters. Most european political parties are social democratic in nature. Not communist (though we have them as well and they are known as the loony left) but social democratic. Our system works for us, sort out your own problems but stop making comparisons with other countries unless you can accept not everyone wants to live under a fascist state. We won that political battle yours is still going on.

You can only have an egalitarian society of poverty is not there as a barrier. In the UK and europe dealing with poverty and creating jobs and opportunity is seen as a function of government. THE EEC was created to kick start the economy of europe after the war. It worked now eastern european countries are desperate to join in and gain from the financial help the EU will give them to get their's going. The EU is flawed, broadly socialist in outlook but it has worked. If the British posters start arguing about the eu we will very quickly lose most american because we have a common historical perspective not shared by americans.

I, like many others, can go in to the historical reasons for that but the circumstances here were vastly different from those in the USA so such comparisons are a bit pointless. You don't have any socialists in america, at least not any that are recognisable as such in the UK. You used to and you had a very active working class political movement. My knowledge is admittedly lacking but they seem to have disappeared.

You are right about one thing though I really don't understand american politics. They're interesting though if a bit weird.

BBob accurately addresses many of the problems in America both social and political but his solution leaves it in the hands of a worse lot than we have now. He wants to move around the branches of the tree, not get at the roots where the problem lies. The problem lies in all facets of our society, you can't pin it on one specific group, movement or anything else. I do know one thing for sure, Americans need jobs back in this country, good paying jobs. Our system is failing in it's obligation of providing opportunity.

As for what happened in Europe after WWII and during the cold war go read your history, just make sure you sort through all propaganda and get to the facts. Make sure you look at things in an unbiased manner.