.. and if you argued for that, I would agree, but lifting people out of poverty != equality. The truth is people are unequal - achieving equality of outcome requires impinging on liberty and achieving equality of opportunity is counter-productive.
-
-
Replying to @pauliegtweets
In order to eliminate inequality (by any definition), it's necessary to first know all the facts about its causes.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal
That is prima facie untrue. To eliminate income/wealth inequality, say, you an simply confiscate all value and redistribute it equally without caring about why more value is/was produced here or there.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @pauliegtweets
No, because without addressing the root causes of inequality, the redistribution would gradually re-redistribute back towards an unequal state.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal
Implied continuous confiscation and continuous redistribution.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @pauliegtweets @G_S_Bhogal
You could also make all production nearly equal (obviously to lowest common denominator) a la Khmer Rouge city-to-fields policy.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal
I wasn't advocating any of those options. I simply pointed out that your claim wrt 'truth' being a necessary requirement for equality is fallacious. It makes for a pithy quote, but is demonstrably untrue.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @pauliegtweets
You still haven't shown why it's fallacious. You said all you'd have to do to make an equal society would be to redistribute wealth. I pointed out that this would be a transient solution at best. That's as far as we got.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal
No. Take N cups, that for whatever reason accumulate different amounts of water over time. Now continuously pour all of the water out of them into a bucket, then refill them equally from that bucket. The reason, ie 'truth', is not required. This is a trivial concept to grasp.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Sorry but that's a terrible comparison. People are not cups, and wealth is not water that stays in a cup forever. Wealth transfer is in the nature of society. If you redistribute wealth and do nothing else, then gradually the wealth will accumulate back to the smartest/luckiest.
-
-
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal @pauliegtweets
Your strategy of continually taking wealth from everyone and then redistributing it sounds like Communism. And if you know anything about history, you'll know that Communist societies invariably ended up the most unequal of all. Your strategy would go the same way.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @G_S_Bhogal
You made a claim. I gave you specific historical examples that falsify that claim. When you failed to comprehend those, I gave you an analogy like they do in kindergarten. The moral judgement of particular historical examples is irrelevant to whether your claim is fallacious.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes - 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.