Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Redistributing Children's Halloween Candy: A Case Study in Coerced "Fairness"
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jim Corrigan" data-source="post: 1975053" data-attributes="member: 24714"><p>Also, to further the analogy, if we assume "candy" is "money" in our token society, and that trick-or-treating is "work", then this guy's own analogy begins from a somewhat commie standpoint. He didn't show the children actually working, because he was at least smart enough to not go down that road. You know, where the kids say "trick or treat!" and the person at the door says "Now here's one for you, one for you, and one for you!"? The assumption is the children with more candy went to more houses in order to build more capital. Of course, none of us know that, they very well might have beaten other children senseless and stolen it. Although I doubt it.</p><p></p><p>Assuming the children only 'earned' more candy by going to more houses, this model still begins with equal pay for equal work, a socialist mechanism. It certainly doesn't begin with outsourced, cheap (illegal) labor. This model certainly puts an equal value on competition, hell it virtually eliminates it. There's nothing stopping children from going to more houses and seeking more candy, but the candy divvied out will never be more or less than it is for any other child. Also, accepting the fact that these children wouldn't be able to make any candy currency at all if other people weren't willing to give it away is fairly damning to this model.</p><p></p><p>I don't know, it's hard to see children literally holding their hands out wanting "candy," then stealing said candy (in a commie/socialist society, you know the rules, they aren't sprung on you after the fact, which actually correlates well with our current tax system) without a prior explanation, not using any actual value system to redistribute, then asking the children what they think about it is a piss poor model for trying to actually educate someone about taxes.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jim Corrigan, post: 1975053, member: 24714"] Also, to further the analogy, if we assume "candy" is "money" in our token society, and that trick-or-treating is "work", then this guy's own analogy begins from a somewhat commie standpoint. He didn't show the children actually working, because he was at least smart enough to not go down that road. You know, where the kids say "trick or treat!" and the person at the door says "Now here's one for you, one for you, and one for you!"? The assumption is the children with more candy went to more houses in order to build more capital. Of course, none of us know that, they very well might have beaten other children senseless and stolen it. Although I doubt it. Assuming the children only 'earned' more candy by going to more houses, this model still begins with equal pay for equal work, a socialist mechanism. It certainly doesn't begin with outsourced, cheap (illegal) labor. This model certainly puts an equal value on competition, hell it virtually eliminates it. There's nothing stopping children from going to more houses and seeking more candy, but the candy divvied out will never be more or less than it is for any other child. Also, accepting the fact that these children wouldn't be able to make any candy currency at all if other people weren't willing to give it away is fairly damning to this model. I don't know, it's hard to see children literally holding their hands out wanting "candy," then stealing said candy (in a commie/socialist society, you know the rules, they aren't sprung on you after the fact, which actually correlates well with our current tax system) without a prior explanation, not using any actual value system to redistribute, then asking the children what they think about it is a piss poor model for trying to actually educate someone about taxes. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Redistributing Children's Halloween Candy: A Case Study in Coerced "Fairness"
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom