andrel wrote:
> On 30-12-2009 11:08, Darren New wrote:
>> andrel wrote:
>>> Well, you never know with Americans. Some seem to religiously believe 
>>> that everybody has at birth the same possibilities*.
>>
>> No, it's more like everyone should get the same opportunities.
> 
> I don't have a problem with 'should'. I do have problems with people 
> implying that it is already the current state.

Certainly. But there's a delicate balance between freedom and "should get 
the same opportunities."  We have a set of laws that cover it, and that set 
of laws are constantly being argued and refined. We have equal opportunity 
employment laws (outlawing discrimination in hiring based on a particular 
list of factors), disabled person access laws (mandating that buildings open 
to the public have to have ramps, for example), and so on.

>> But if you're unable to take advantage of the opportunity, you don't 
>> get to leech off someone else.
> 
> As a socialist ;) I should reply that quite a lot of people are unable 
> to take advantage, simple because in practice they don't get the 
> opportunity.

Note how I phrased it. They have the opportunity, but they're unable to take 
advantage of it. Nothing *external* is stopping someone with an IQ of 80 
from winning a Nobel prize. Nothing *external* is stopping someone with no 
arms from being a carpenter.

> responsibility as a society to act as an extended family and take care 
> of them. You might call that leeching, I don't. 

It depends, really. I have no problem with supporting the relatively small 
number of people who are really physically incapable of being gainfully 
employed.

I haven't any problem with public schooling. I have a problem with 
*removing* opportunities from those who *can* take advantage of them 
*because* there are people who *cannot*, you see. Which is what this thread 
started as a discussion of.

>> Everyone should be allowed to buy a house. That doesn't mean we take 
>> houses from people who own two and give them to people who are too 
>> poor to buy their own, you see.
> 
> I am not aware that anybody suggested that.

No. It was an example of extremism in the other direction.

I think a middle ground is reasonable, in this and most things. The problem 
with stereotypes of Americans is that you only hear, for the most part, the 
extreme ends of the spectrum, because of the economics and politics of 
getting people fired up. If you're already happy with the middle-ground we 
have, you don't get on the radio and try to work people up to support it.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
   much longer being almost empty than almost full.

Post a reply to this message