- Capitalism and Alternatives -

More on

Posted by: Nikhil Jaikumar ( PCC, MA, USA ) on July 16, 1999 at 03:15:34:

I probably should have added this to the thread below, but I wanted to post this in a more public forum for others to participate.

There is what seems to me lke an inconsistency in your argument. Viz. teh following.

You claim that it's unfair to the rich baby whop inherits wealth, educational advamntages, good health care, etc. to take stuff away from him to equalize it fro everyone else. You referred, I think, to "hobbling" the rich kid to make evryone else run faster.

Leaving aside the question fo whether the rich must lose their privileges to help uplift the poor. In some things like education, I find thsi highly quetsionable- tehre's no reason why we can't educate EVRYONE at a high level. But I am willing to concede that in some things the rich will lose their privileges as we strive to make society more equal.

It doesn't matter. We're idscussing children here, spo let's keep discussing the,m., let's not bring in whetehr their parents worked or stole the wealth taht they enjoy. Earlier on you conceded that the rich babies do not deserve their good fortune, any more than the poor deserve their misery. I think you said it was "neither justice nor injustice" that they were well-off.

If I do not "deserve" something, then I have no claim on it. Remember the fable of....I think it's "the woldf and the lion", something liek that. The mroal is essentailly that if you get something easily and cheaply, you shouldn't compain too much if you lose it. here is an analogy. If I see a dollar bill floating down from the sky, and OI hold out my hand to grab it, at what point does it becoem "my" dollar bill? It's actually never MY dollar bill- it belongs to the guy who lost it, even if he never gets it back. If I see it coming, but then some kid recahes out of a window and takes it as it floats down, do I have any right to be angry? No. It wasn't mine in the first place, so I wasn't entitled to it.

"Theft" means that perosn A is entitled to something but person B takes possession. but hwo can teh baby be "entitled" to something if they didn't do anything to deserve it?

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup