Pick One - A or B

[Sanctuary]

Taken from the Wall Street Journal, this is word for word survey that was conducted by a nonprofit group:


Which of the following statements about the role of government comes closer to your view?

A. Government policies should promote fairness by narrowing the gap between rich and poor, spreading the wealth, and making sure that economic outcomes are more equal.

B. Government policies should promote opportunity by fostering job growth, encouraging entrepreneurs, and allowing people to keep more of what they earn.

[bluesummer]

I think option A sounds pretty communist.

Option B is better for the economy, creating jobs and encouraging entrepreneurs will stimulate the economy much better than taking from the rich to feed the poor. Besides, I'm of the mind that if you decided to drop out of school in grade 9 and have 5 kids and smoke crack, you probably deserve to have nothing. Reward those that put out the effort.

[MVPlaya]

The distinction is arbitrary and not grounded in political reality. Not to mention that it assumes that each method is guaranteed a specific outcome.

I believe in a growing economy that results in an increased quality of life for its citizens.

[Gribble]

I think people are selfish. If you don't have a little of A in the mix you'll have folks starving in the streets for no fault of their own. Dad gets himself mangled in machinery, can't work. Now mom's pulling double-shifts at IHOP and moonlighting at night making spare cash on her back while Junior's aspirations of going to Princeton go down the drain.

I vote C; a little of both.

[bluesummer]

We weren't given that option.

But in reality, like MVP said, neither of the outcomes are grounded in political reality. Sort of pie-in-the sky. Gov't actually tries to work with both ends, but some lean more one way or the other. To go option B sounds pretty capitalist, and I tend to lean that way, so that's what I picked. But then, I'm a banker.

[DoesntMatter]

Now mom's pulling double-shifts at IHOP and moonlighting at night making spare cash on her back while Junior's aspirations of going to Princeton go down the drain.

No they aren't. All the Ivy League schools give only need based scholarships. If your parents make around under $40k a year you essentially go for free

[Aeradalia]

A is more of a communist idealogy and B is more of a capitalist ideology. B encourages people to actually work hard, whereas A is inherently self-destructive.

However, capitalism though a good idea can be self-destructive if left unchecked as well.


I picked the lessor of the two evils -- B. There's bound to be something better later on, but for now, it's the best we got.

[Mish]

I vote for option D. Government policies should promote social harmony, invest in infrastructure that would benefit everyone and foster dialogue and working relationships between different communities.

[Aeradalia]

How would that work with humanity's natural instincts? It's not in our nature to work with others without seeing some immediate benefit for ourselves.

That's why communism fails, because people can't see the "big picture" on an instinctual level and are more inclined to find 'shortcuts' that serve their own self-interests -- even at the cost of destroying the system they depend on.

Capitalism rewards greed and punishes excessive greed, and thus typically keeps some sort of balance.

[MVPlaya]

There is no such thing as "humanity's natural instincts," that is just a series of made-up nonsensical arguments that date back to the debate between Hobbes and Locke, neither of whom had any idea what "man in his natural state" was like and just made a bunch of shit up to justify their arguments for how a government should be run.

There are many altruistic people who will spend lifetimes working for the benefit of other with little or no compensation for self. There are many educated people who refuse to get high paying private sector jobs and choose to use their education to teach instead.

Reductionist arguments trying to paint humanity any one way are just self-serving tools to justify one's political leanings.

And by the way, capitalism does not punish excessive greed. What you are discussing is a mix of socialism and capitalism.

[Mish]

That's why communism fails, because people can't see the "big picture" on an instinctual level and are more inclined to find 'shortcuts' that serve their own self-interests -- even at the cost of destroying the system they depend on.

Communism failed in many countries because it was never about communism in there in the first place. It was more about dictatorship with some scarce socialist illusions. (E.g. Soviet Union). I think the countries that came closest to the idea of communism and its implementation are Western European countries. And maybe to a lesser extent Canada and Australia.

Capitalism rewards greed and punishes excessive greed, and thus typically keeps some sort of balance.

Capitalism on its own (without any regulation) is a very self destructive mechanism. As can be seen from the recent events. It doesn't punish excessive greed at all, it rewards it. Most of the architects of the crisis like CEOs who were paid millions for making mistakes walked away from the crisis unscathed. Capitalism has no ethics and no sustainability. It's a train without brakes heading towards a broken bridge. It can be seen by a simple fact that 80 years later, most of the elements that caused the great depression of 1929 are still there.

How would that work with humanity's natural instincts? It's not in our nature to work with others without seeing some immediate benefit for ourselves.

First of all by building infrastructure that benefits everyone, roads, hospitals, public transport, that's already being done. Secondly, people need to realize that our immediate benefit lies with the well being of people and communities that make up the world around us. We are all inter related. The more suffering there is around us, the more suffering will be inflicted on us. The more people around us live positive and productive lives the better in turn our lives will be.

[AdminOnline]

A. Government policies should promote fairness by narrowing the gap between rich and poor, spreading the wealth, and making sure that economic outcomes are more equal.

This remind me of my current situation here in singapore... our govt is 'accelerating' the gap RIGHT NOW. Influx of Foreigners and buying of flats(houses) at crazy price..

increase in transport fare, food price etc!

Despite the crisis and unemployment going on...

BS!

[Cbrider]

No they aren't. All the Ivy League schools give only need based scholarships. If your parents make around under $40k a year you essentially go for free

Wait, what? Where's ur grammatical skillz son.

[Gigabitch]

There is no such thing as "humanity's natural instincts,"

I disagree. I believe that humanity is naturally inclined to be self-serving. What they do with that depends on how much of the big picture they see. For some, it doesn't even extend past their own self and they will **** their own family over. Some are saintly.

There are many altruistic people who will spend lifetimes working for the benefit of other with little or no compensation for self. There are many educated people who refuse to get high paying private sector jobs and choose to use their education to teach instead.

Wish there were more of those.

[IndiReloaded]

There are many educated people who refuse to get high paying private sector jobs and choose to use their education to teach instead.

There are many educated people who get decent-paying jobs who use their education to teach. Professors make very good money by most standards.

Guess I wonder what you mean by 'high paying'. There is nothing wrong with very skilled people being paid well.