“A society that aims for equality before liberty will end up with neither equality nor liberty.
And a society that aims first for liberty will not end up with equality, but it will end up with a closer approach to equality than any other kind of system that has ever been developed” — Milton Friedman

I would welcome your thoughts on this quote.
But first, access your motivational settings in your brain and dial “Desire to understand the big picture” up to 11 and “Desire to prove myself right/others wrong” down to about 2″

(Oh, and if you just want to find fault with the source, dial yourself into the penalty box for the duration of this thread!)




33 Comments

Leave a response

You must be to post a response.

  1. immortal_pirate 2 months ago

    I would agree whole heartedly with Mr. Friedman’s statement.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

  2. Jear77 2 months ago

    There’s a difference between equality and equity. Equality isn’t *always* the ideal, equity is a better idea. Google it and you’ll get a comic showing the difference. Liberty has no part in such a discussion.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      griz 2 months ago

      @Jear77
      The problem with output equality as an ideal (Ie, equity) is that Liberty and Freedom need to be sacrificed for it to be realized.

      Is that cartoon the one with three boys standing on boxes looking over a fence? Did you notice that they all looked like brothers? Without meaning to this cartoon actually highlights the fact that such Equity thinking only works in small-scale social structures like the family, or small tribe. And thinking like this propagates beyond its native habitat with more and more people trying to foolishly apply small-scale Solutions into large-scale society.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 months ago

        @griz equity is different from equality. Equity gives each the help s/he needs. Equality doesn’t distinguish between differing factors. If you have 3 boxes and 3 children, at a fence equality gives each a box. But equity gives the shortest 2, the medium sized kid 1, and the tallest gets none.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 2 months ago

        @Jear77
        That they appear part of the same small family group is exactly the point. This is the only place where equity works, because child freedom and responsibilities are not the same as adult freedom in responsibilities.

        There’s another meme where the letters of the word Equity are stretching to prop children up to pick apples from a tree. Again this systems works with incompetent babies but not with competent adults. It requires an empowered nanny-state to make arbitrary life decisions for adults to balance equations. It absolutely kills productivity, innovation, . . . and people!

        If I still need (expect) the same income as a top producer but my production is low, I don’t deserve the same pay. That’s the whole equal pay for equal work riff.
        And if I am a low producer should I be carried by the high producer? Where is his incentive to be a high producer if I’m going to get the same pay for being a low producer? And worse are they going to take pay from him to give it to me?

        This kind of social reconstructionism has been tried and failed numerous times in the 20th century alone, to a greater body count than the Nazis.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 months ago

        @griz yet this is exactly the message of the bible… “no matter when you accept god the outcome (heaven) is exactly the same.” Heaven IS this “Nanny state”

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 2 months ago

        @Jear77
        “For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the basic principles of the oracles of God. You need milk, not solid food, for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, since he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil.” Heb 5:12-14.

        I’ve always maintained you’ve been exposed to a very infantilizing Christian doctrine, as is found in WAY too many churches . . . and that they need to grow the hell up and take their rightful place of competence in the Heavenly Kingdom — or else end up in a hellish place.

        Those who don’t, inhabit a special place in Dante’s Inferno where what they fear (a heavenly nanny-state) is what they turn around and crave (a government-based nanny-state).

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 months ago

        @griz but remember god knew this all along… and did nothing to stop it, change it. So it goes back to the point of not setting up a system and then complaining about the results. And should he send any to hell based on this, it’s god playing the victim as in Manchauser syndrome, the only escape being his proxy.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 2 months ago

        @Jear77
        What others do and don’t know is really their business. Ours is what we do and don’t know. But if we focus on the former we can try to put all of the blame on them and take none ourselves.

        We arguably have a good deal of control over the system that is how we interact with the world.

        So why are we complaining about that system and looking for others to blame?

        There is an inexorable flow to the Mississippi River even at low stage. Work with it and a lot can be accomplished. Fight against it and you lose, and the river just keeps on flowing.

        So in this scenario is failure to adopt a winning strategy matched to the existing conditions the river’s failure?

        Or yours?

        If there is a way to do something to good effect and we refuse to do it unto bad effect . . . Whose fault is that?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 months ago

        @griz that control is an illusion, a fallacy even, given a multitude of factors. We can control what we eat – within the boundaries of what we can afford. We can control where we live – within the limits of our budget, things like racism, sexism, and if someone wants to rent/ sell to us. We can control how much and what physical activity we do – based on such factors as weather (you can’t go swimming outsude in einter for instance, without risking illmess), wealth (you can’t go to the gym without $ to pay for it), and time (if you’re at a desk &/or driving all day, and your company’s not set up for “standing / walking desks” your physical activity will be limited), and ability to do what you want (i.e. you’re physically disabled). You can apply to any job you want, but unless you have an inside person, your ability to get a job is limited. Then there’s factors as to how much they pay, their distance, etc. Then there’s problems with the mind – depression, schizophrenia, dissociation identity disorder, various symptoms that limit one’s mental faculties. So even with the happiest, most optimistic viewpoint in the world, attitude can’t change one’s circumstances, and many times putting a positive spin on your situation is an insult to the intelligence of those around you who see the reality of the situation. Y’see i don’t think the point of life is to trick yourself into believing that the situations you’re going (or have gone) through are hunky dorey, but to strive your best to make them better. That’s why a god who can’t / won’t grant his followers power cosmic, a diety who’s supposed to be more powerful than Galactus, puts a bad taste in my mouth. Such powers would make one’s life infinitely easier!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 2 months ago

        @Jear77
        Even the illusion of control regulates your brain chemicals unto being in better degrees of actual control. (The serotonin/cortisol response).

        We’ve spoke of this fallacious way of thinking before Jear — the idea that the impossibility of total control is ZERO reason for failing to exercise the control that is possible. I think ideological possession could be a factor.

        Control is something YOU exercise on YOURSELF. Not on others unto their doing what YOU want. That’s tyranny.

        Look. Finding excuses is a 4 year-old’s exercise. We need to move beyond that to see just what kind of adult control and responsibility for ourselves we can exercise.

        Actually, positive outlook also positively affects the serotonin/cortisol response. And negative attitude invites depression (what happens when the chemical response feeds-back negative).
        Which BTW, also affects exercise/manifestation of competency. So we’re back to this ludicrous feed-back loop of excuses why one cannot be competent and/or responsible for oneself.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 months ago

        @griz the fact that they may or may not be brothers is immaterial. Part of it goes back to efficiency, something i know you, as a truck driver, has to be aware of. If you’re inefficient with your time or money, there’s trouble. Even driving for another company, i’m 100% sure that there’s ways to get more out of it by being an entrepreneur along the way and picking up small loads along the way just by making a slight detour, so you’re not “dead heading.” This ties in with the conversations we’ve been having in regards to competency. The one that needs no help in the illustration gets none because he’s competent enough not to need it. The one that gets one box needs a bit of help, and the one who gets 2 needs a lot more help. Extend this udea to society as a whole: instead of leaving me in the lurch, without any employment for basically 20 years, a program could exist that would work with others to make them more and more and more competent, even to the point of providing transportation to and from the location, as well as a stipend – not much, but enough to cover basic needs. Eventually people would graduate from the program or be placed in one that would support them the rest of their lives. And within a few days, weeks, or months it should be apparent which program the individual needs to be put into. And no courts should have to be involved to provide individuals sustenance.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

    • Weenis 2 months ago

      @Jear77 Equity is not the better of the two………

      Equity means you take from people who have money, and give it to other people to balance the universe’s injustices.

      This argument does take freedom into question, seeing as how to have a system of equity, those who have will get theirs taken away to give to those who don’t have. Meaning, people aren’t free to keep what they earn.

      The other side of this entire argument is over outcome and opportunity.

      But, Jear my dear, you being a proponent of equity isn’t surprising in the least. I’d also expect that you’re also erroneously in support of equality of outcome.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 months ago

        @Weenis not at all. The 3 boxes in my example are owned by no one. They’re sitting out, waiting to be used… or thrown out. No one is having anything taken from them.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Weenis 2 months ago

        @Jear77

        Are you talking about the 3 boxes from the comic?

        The one attached?

        See, the fallacy with the comic is that it perpetuates the idea that there’s just a bunch of free boxes.

        The boxes aren’t free, they’re earned. So all 3 of the individuals have the equal opportunity to earn boxes, and earn enough boxes so that they can be elevated above the fence to watch the game.

        You say “The 3 boxes in my example are owned by no one”, but the problem is, where does someone get a box, or 3? Who pays for the boxes? Who pays for the “whatever” that levels the playing field?

        Also, if the “whatever” that levels the playing field is free and/or owned by no one, then why is there, in your words, an inequality or inequity problem?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 months ago

        @Weenis there’s lots of things findable out there. Milk crates are a perfect example. If i were a bit more ambitious, and people were a bit less picky, i could’ve been quite a lot more financially independent by collecting cans from people’s garbage. But there’s the problem of the city wanting to get that money (which actually costs them more than it’s worth)

        Let’s extend this analogy a bit. I see the comic as showing “the help that is needed” – a person who needs no help gets none. In fact, it’s insulting to offer it if unnecessary. A person who needs a bit of help (or more) is able to obtain itwithout problems, not because something is being taken away from someone else, but because there are programs at a societal level. Said programs create jobs. That more people have money to spend also creates more jobs… because they’re actually spending, not being broke. Win. Win. Win.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Weenis 2 months ago

        @Jear77

        But even then “help” costs something. It costs money, or time, or both. Help will either be in the form of a good or service.

        Who pays for it? And is the payment of such “help” forced on the populace?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 months ago

        @Weenis volunteerism is one very large piece of the equation. Another is laws need to be a bit more lax when it comes to legitimately earning money, and people need to be a bit less picky on regards to others’ ways of earning money (i.e. not complain when people pick through their garbage.) In my hometown there’s a place that has a dual business model of volunteers and paid employees. If you volunteered, you were top on the list ro get hired.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Weenis 2 months ago

        @Jear77

        Sure, volunteer away. Volunteer to your heart’s content, but volunteering is just that, opting in to something. It’s not forced.

        Now, you mention laws, what do you mean? What laws are contributing to inequity or inequality?

        You mention picking through garbage, but it’s my garbage. It’s my property until the garbage is collected. Also, this is a security issue as well as a property rights issue. If someone is rifling through my garbage, first, they could be planting something in my garbage that isn’t appropriate or legal, or second, they could be taking sensitive items from my garbage, like envelopes with names of the home owners, or other documents.

        Dumpster diving is legitimately a thing – https://www.techopedia.com/definition/10267/dumpster-diving

        Also, the picking through the garbage is a way for people to make money without paying taxes.

        Now, with everything that you said, I’m still not seeing any realistic or substantial way to create equity like you’re originally proposing.

        So I ask again, where does all the “help” come from to right an entire society against these perceived injustices?

        Btw, I’m going along with your perceived injustices, granting you them, without you proving them, because I don’t believe these systematic injustices exist.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 2 months ago

        @Weenis
        I would propose that the main “systemic Injustice” is that all hierarchies of competence (the basis of capitalism) shed the dispossessed off the bottom rungs.

        And capitalism doesn’t seem to have/care about an answer for this. It’s focus it is to advance, not play rear guard.

        Stretching back into New Testament times there was alms for the poor at the temple gate, which arguably became part of the worship unto God who has blessed you so richly.

        In Old Testament times it was perhaps more communal tithes we’re singing like offerings of grain 50 doors back into the community at the priest’s discretion.

        But this has all been handed over to government, who is mandate is more fiscal than moral or spiritual. And there is the very real possibility that a more streamlined system has resulted in more feelings of entitlement.

        And also as @jear77 has implied, the mechanisms that have evolved to keep people from taking advantage of state welfare dissuade people from working their way out of it.

        If you do something to try to improve your lot, you are penalized.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 2 months ago

        @Weenis
        There is good reason to suggest much of this kind of thinking comes out of the infantilizing processes of entitlement thinking and taking things for granted.

        Things that children particularly excel at! They tend to adopt simplistic (almost magical) models of how those “boxes” come into existence for them to use unto “equity”.
        Or their computer, or internet, cellphone or allowance, or heat/ac for the house . . . . or why all the lights are running, the toilets flushing, roads being paved, the degree of peace and freedoms they just take for granted.

        We need to recognize that for thousands of years (perhaps more?) women have been essentially running the small-scale social construct of the home, where things like compassion and placating/keeping the peace with experientially incompetent children, determined their giftings/skillsets/or very evolution (for those believing such).

        And now with all the technological advancements freeing them, they want to start trying to apply these small-scale social processes dealing with children, to very complex large-scale social processes dealing with competent adults possessed of free moral agency.

        And the results are pretty much what one would expect when one tries to implement simplistic and often (increasingly) totalitarian solutions like “equity”, upon adults interacting in an insanely complex democratic free-market system.

        And it’s also quite understandable that sectors of the population would prefer the simplicity of a free ride, with the things they need, just “materializing” as they have need.
        I think this is the proverbial hook-line-and sinker of collectivist reconstructionism.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 2 months ago

        @Jear77
        Even those “free” milk crates didn’t appear out of thin air. In reality, they belong to the distributors of the products and their use for any other purpose is illegal — though it’s seldom enforced.

        So this too is a flaw of that line of equity thinking. It simply doesn’t work in the mid- to long-run — as SOMEBODY has to pay for what’s giving the incompetent a boost.
        (In the context of the cartoons at least, as they are intentionally crafted using children. But perhaps beyond?)

        What if “the person who needs no help”, is the one who built those “free” boxes or owns those milk crates because of the sweat of their brow and effort of their mind and hand?

        As you have done with the milk crates, are we just to “presume” they are ours to use as we wish?
        That’s just some of the dangerous thinking that underlies equity ideology.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 months ago

        @griz the moment something is discarded, misplaced, lost, or simply unclaimed… finders keepers, loser weepers. I’ve lost hundreds of dollars over the years & Just shrugged it off. Were it of great value, it would be carefully kept track of, hoarded even. That’s one thing i disagree with @weenis in his statement. If you don’t want others to go though your garbage, make sure you’re off during the time it’s being collected and hand it to the sanitation workers personally… or don’t complain that someone else is trying to better their life. If what’s in my garbage would allow someone to eat, more power to them.

        Also, what would your sution be to deal with the incompetent? Leave them there? That’d be a REALLY Christian thing to do (sarcasm, sarcasm). And such a solution is not one of love, for doing so is neither patient or kind. Furthermore, holding one’s past incompetence against them would be remembering their wrongs, and keeping them there would be a form of “delighting in evil” – and to give up on such would be a faulure to perseverance. So it doesn’t matter the cost. As a Christian not to do so is sin!

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 2 months ago

        @Jear77
        Taking advantage of others’ inattention trust or misfortune is a bastard process that toxifies the psyche. It doesn’t even sit well with equity ideology! (And that’s quite the black mark!)

        There was a problem within Marxism as well where people had trouble discerning between equity, and covetousness (bitterness that someone else had more than you).

        The solution to the incompetent is certainly not compassion; because that infantilizes, creates dependency and gives no incentive to develop competency. It is the “Oh, poor baby” mindset where femininity toxifies.

        It’s something more like consideration for the situation they are in. It is the teaching them how to fish rather than just giving them a fish. (Or justifying their stealing it from someone who is weakened, indisposed, trusting or not paying attention!)

        The idea with repentance from past wrongs (or incompetence), involves your doing something about it and not remaining in that dismal state and just looking for others to blame.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Jear77 2 months ago

        @griz in my daily life, with how poor i am, if i find something of value, i’d be stupid to give it back! Put another way, if you were totally naked, found something to cover yourself, completely without food, on the brink of death starving and found some, were destitute, homeless, about to die from exposure to the elementsand found a place to be… you’d give up those things under some misguided mlral standard? Or if you found something to better yourself, you wouldn’t take advantage? No. I can’t be that person. And you realize in your daily life you do without realizing it. By holding a job, you take the opportunity to have others have your job. By eating something, someone else won’t be able to do so. That’s the nature of how things are.

        Do keep in mind in regards to incompetence, there are those who can’t/ won’t be able to learn -ever. Or it may take years… decades to do so. What of them?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 2 months ago

        @Jear77
        Only if noble = stupid.

        Let’s remember that if you have a regular paying job you are probably in the top 5% richest people in the world. (Perhaps 10% with the recent drop in world abject poverty rates between 2000 and 2013).
        Imagining ourselves worse off than we are (especially just to justify doing something bastard), doesn’t do anyone any good.

        I’m not sure your brain was in gear for that job comment! I rob others of having a job, by my having a job?? Where the hell did that come from?? :rolf: What dark ideology has you by the nuts?

        If you find something to better yourself, you can’t be the person who would do it?? Holy shit Jear!! Do we need to send an exorcist your way to purge you of this unclean spirit haunting your thoughts??

        What of those who can never exercise comptency? I answered that. Consideration. Not compassion. For the reasons stated.
        But why imagine yourself less capable than you actually are?

        (Because then you might have to take responsibility for yourself. And interestingly enough, taking adult responsibility for oneself is the cure to the dark ideologies that haunt people’s mind with this kind of brainless drivel).

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 2 months ago

        @Weenis
        The comic is also skewed because it uses children designed to elicit emotional response, and not competent adults.

        And one of the key historical problems with this kind of collectivist reconstructionism ideology, is that once you’ve infantilized the population why stop there?

        Especially when some “judicious” dehumanizing of the populace will speed you to your utopian goals?

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

      • Author
        griz 2 months ago

        @Weenis
        It’s perhaps even worse than them not being able to keep what they earn/create.

        If it’s just going to be taken away in whole or in part for those who have not created/earned, the whole framework of innovation collapses.

        It’s perverse that those conspiring the strongest to demonize and bring down the current system . . . do so using the abundant fruits of that system taken entirely for granted.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

  3. ladybarbara 2 months ago

    One of my adventures in life found me living in Russia for 3 months in 1992, and getting to see Socialist Communism up close. Those who worked for wages had to give more than half their wages to people who did not work. The donated wages bought rations for everyone (after the Government took the lion’s share for itself.) The lines for rationed goods were very long and took up most of the day standing in line. Those who worked all day had hardly any time left over for standing in lines. So, they had to have family members to stand in line to get that day’s bread and a potato. A worker with no family and no wife — living alone — could starve. Where is the liberty? Where is the freedom? When I say they stood in long lines for a hunk of bread and a potato, I mean exactly that. The government doesn’t provide for the people very well.
    People that have jobs begin to think that they may as well give up the job and stand in lines like everyone else. Soon, fewer and fewer people are working and contributing and rations get even more meager. Now, the bread is only a treat once a month and the daily ration is a potato.
    In 3 months of living in these conditions, I only saw toilet paper once. They were handing out 10 squares off of the roll to whatever family member stood in line. I got very sick from eating nothing but potatoes for 3 months.

    If you don’t think it gets that bad, look at Venezuela. People had to eat their pets. Then they ate zoo animals. Then they were picking through trash bins for food. What freedom!!! What liberty!!! Everyone is equal — except the ruling class. The ruling class lives in luxury.

    I was so happy to get on a jet and fly back home. They may have equality, but I will take freedom and democracy any day. This is the land of the free and land of plenty. This is the land of liberty. We are not all equal, but we don’t have to beg food and stand in lines. We don’t have to dig in dumpsters for a day’s meal. Those who want to work can keep the pay they worked so hard for. Maybe we have to pay taxes and for our own Social Security, but we have freedom. I don’t have to spend 7 hours of my day standing in a long line for a potato.

    It made me worship grocery shopping. Immortal Pirate thinks I am crazy to like grocery shopping, but I came to appreciate the shelves and shelves of foods and products and the money to buy what I want. I have seen places where grocery shopping is unheard of, or a luxury.
    Ahhhhh! Freedom and liberty!!!!

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      griz 2 months ago

      @ladybarbara
      I saw a photo from the Ukraine famine (I think it was 1932 Holodomor) where a needlessly starving 12 year old boy had the freedom to kill and eat his 8 year old brother.

      This Supreme Soviet had already swooped in and taken all of their grain, and the stray individual grains left in the dirt we’re not free grains (like the “free boxes” in the equity cartoon).
      They belonged to the state, and to presume you could wisely distribute them to your starving Children on behalf of the state, was punishable by Gulag/death.

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

  4. five2one 2 months ago

    I think the whole thing is screwed up, and there is nothing man or humankind can do to unscrew it. They are the ones who did this. You just replace one manner of tyranny with another.

    It has always been popular vote. It was never just Hitler or just Stalin or just Pontius Pilate.

    It has always been people, working together, to build a great tower to the sky. Going along with whatever new tyranny and tyrant that they can find.

    Liberty can only come by a true state change, an ascension beyond the flesh.

    Otherwise, both terms are loaded. These days.

    We live in a world where equality should mean all are treated as human beings, but many treat others as they see them — less then human.

    We live in a world where liberty should mean we all are free from the tyranny of tyrants, but there are many tyrants, singular and plural, who lord it over everyone else — and they, themselves have it lorded over them. Except those at the very top.

    We plant, and others harvest it.

    We are continual victims to the greed of the strong, and the cold hearted. Those of depraved minds.

    Change will come, but not by human hands.

    Reply

    You must be to vote.

    • Author
      griz 2 months ago

      @five2one
      Until Perfection comes we may need to redefine the term “treating another like a human being”.

      Pop culture right now seems to think this means coddling them, but this lapses very easily into toxic femininity and the classic Jungian Devouring Mother.

      But it may be more akin to letting them struggle to their feet; to fall and pick themselves back up; to exercise the competency to fly away from the nest.

      This produces strength and freedom. The former produces dependency and weakness.

      What may yet come by meta-human agency is a fine theoretical discussion. But we need sings we can do right now (Ie, “redeeming the time” from Scripture)

      Reply

      You must be to vote.

      • five2one 2 months ago

        @griz “But it may be more akin to letting them struggle to their feet; to fall and pick themselves back up; to exercise the competency to fly away from the nest.”

        Basically, how I was raised. How I am raised.

        But, at the same time, I am not left alone. Constantly trained, advised. Just have to figure things out, though, too.

        “What may yet come by meta-human agency is a fine theoretical discussion. But we need sings we can do right now (Ie, “redeeming the time” from Scripture)”

        Perhaps… but, then, doing as you detailed, and as I detailed, means the best way to help, very well may mean to do nothing. Let them figure it out on their own.

        I find myself in something like the wandering in the wilderness. Where I am humbled, and forced to trust in God. I am all Mr Rocket. Hard for me to do. Hard for anyone to do. We want to do something meaningful. Say something meaningful. Move. Do something! But, there are times, when you need to step back, and let God do something.

        Depends on your compulsion, where God has you. I have times of immense activity. I am always “working”, but not aiming for anything per se. Doing a ‘gardening and my own head trip thing’. Working out truths, with friends, in deep conversations. Making obscure posts in obscure places.

        Watching. Waiting. Enjoying Rome burning, and the wheels turning.

        Resting.

        Reply

        You must be to vote.

©2019 Soul Sequel | All Rights Reserved

 
or

Log in with your credentials

or    

Forgot your details?

or

Create Account