Maybe one day you'll discover that putting hard work and being deserving is a bit easier if you are Jean Phillipe from Versailles, have wealthy and cultured parents, got a good education, went to a great school, lived in a friendly environment and be supported to death in your studies than if you are Mohammed from the 9-3, go to a shit school, in a shit area, have no support whatsoever from your parents, have a poor education, never go in holidays, etc etc etc etc...
No it's not. In fact that is the exact opposite of the definition of "deserving".
I will give you that it's harder for Mohamed du 93 to get a good diploma compared to Jean-Phillipe from Versailles. In fact that's exactly what I said... It's harder, but it's possible and that's what matters.
Yeah it is possible. So the 1% kids who escape their parents condition because they are lucky and have exceptional life justify the fact that the 99% other will have the life they are supposed to have because they are born there: a shit life.
Great.
No, not lucky, but precisely "deserving".
What makes you deserving? Your experience. That's what you don't get.
Our environment makes us what we are. If you are lucky, it turns you end up completely different that what you wre supposed to be given your environment.
For Christ sake, read Bourdieu or any sociology at all.
I'm willing to bet I've read more Bourdieu than anyone on this forum You people need to stop thinking that people with a different opinion then yours are illiterate...
If you do not believe in merit over luck, than there is an ideological barrier that separates us that I'm afraid no amount of post will help overcome.
Maybe one day you'll discover that putting hard work and being deserving is a bit easier if you are Jean Phillipe from Versailles, have wealthy and cultured parents, got a good education, went to a great school, lived in a friendly environment and be supported to death in your studies than if you are Mohammed from the 9-3, go to a shit school, in a shit area, have no support whatsoever from your parents, have a poor education, never go in holidays, etc etc etc etc...
No it's not. In fact that is the exact opposite of the definition of "deserving".
I will give you that it's harder for Mohamed du 93 to get a good diploma compared to Jean-Phillipe from Versailles. In fact that's exactly what I said... It's harder, but it's possible and that's what matters.
Yeah it is possible. So the 1% kids who escape their parents condition because they are lucky and have exceptional life justify the fact that the 99% other will have the life they are supposed to have because they are born there: a shit life.
Great.
No, not lucky, but precisely "deserving".
What makes you deserving? Your experience. That's what you don't get.
Our environment makes us what we are. If you are lucky, it turns you end up completely different that what you wre supposed to be given your environment.
For Christ sake, read Bourdieu or any sociology at all.
People like him reject Bourdieu for "determinism"... lol
You people also need to stop being so condescending
Maybe one day you'll discover that putting hard work and being deserving is a bit easier if you are Jean Phillipe from Versailles, have wealthy and cultured parents, got a good education, went to a great school, lived in a friendly environment and be supported to death in your studies than if you are Mohammed from the 9-3, go to a shit school, in a shit area, have no support whatsoever from your parents, have a poor education, never go in holidays, etc etc etc etc...
No it's not. In fact that is the exact opposite of the definition of "deserving".
I will give you that it's harder for Mohamed du 93 to get a good diploma compared to Jean-Phillipe from Versailles. In fact that's exactly what I said... It's harder, but it's possible and that's what matters.
Yeah it is possible. So the 1% kids who escape their parents condition because they are lucky and have exceptional life justify the fact that the 99% other will have the life they are supposed to have because they are born there: a shit life.
Great.
No, not lucky, but precisely "deserving".
What makes you deserving? Your experience. That's what you don't get.
Our environment makes us what we are. If you are lucky, it turns you end up completely different that what you wre supposed to be given your environment.
For Christ sake, read Bourdieu or any sociology at all.
I'm willing to bet I've read more Bourdieu than anyone on this forum You people need to stop thinking that people with a different opinion then yours are illiterate...
If you do not believe in merit over luck, than there is an ideological barrier that separates us that I'm afraid no amount of post will help overcome.
I bet Jean Sarkozy was very desrving when he got nominated at the head of the EPAD. lol
Yeah, I think this discussion is useless. I also know people who see a homeless and think "he didn't make any effort taht's why he is there". Usually they don't realize that they had themselves everything to succeed. But hey, it's good to think of ourself that we are doing well because of how awesome we inherently are.
Rejection of social determination is just as old as liberalism, what makes it an unfair ideology. The pathetic justification about the "hard work that pays" and the extraordinary refusal to see that "merit" comes from somewhere and that we were not born deserving or not deserving always puzzled me. I would prefer people like you saying that they are fine with life being completely unfair and admit they don't give a crap about the most vulnerable ones. That would be more honest.
On May 03 2012 03:13 Nyarly wrote: Hehe geiko, it's already the second time you stop answering to me. Maybe next time you'll finaly decide to change your opinions ?
I'm terribly sorry Nyarly, but you're taking me into the domain of opinions vs other opinions.
I really don't know how to answer your post because, what can I say ? I believe in teaching my children that women have equal rights to men and shouldn't wear a piece of cloth to hide their face. I totally get that other cultures around the world don't agree with me on everything, I totally get that maybe I'm not conveying an absolute truth, but I'm conveying moral values which I believe to be right. I believe these values are part of our heritage and part of our identity as a nation. That doesn't mean that my children will take everything I say at face value, this just means that I'm telling them about an identity, about a cultural background. Values change overtime, but always progressively. Every sudden change in a Nation's moral values has always been accompanied with tears and blood (sometimes for the best like the French revolution). I can't really give you more than that on the subject
On May 03 2012 03:13 Nyarly wrote: Hehe geiko, it's already the second time you stop answering to me. Maybe next time you'll finaly decide to change your opinions ?
I'm terribly sorry Nyarly, but you're taking me into the domain of opinions vs other opinions.
I really don't know how to answer your post because, what can I say ? I believe in teaching my children that women have equal rights to men and shouldn't wear a piece of cloth to hide their face. I totally get that other cultures around the world don't agree with me on everything, I totally get that maybe I'm not conveying an absolute truth, but I'm conveying moral values which I believe to be right. I believe these values are part of our heritage and part of our identity as a nation. That doesn't mean that my children will take everything I say at face value, this just means that I'm telling them about an identity, about a cultural background. Values change overtime, but always progressively. Every sudden change in a Nation's moral values has always been accompanied with tears and blood (sometimes for the best like the French revolution). I can't really give you more than that on the subject
Maybe one day you'll discover that putting hard work and being deserving is a bit easier if you are Jean Phillipe from Versailles, have wealthy and cultured parents, got a good education, went to a great school, lived in a friendly environment and be supported to death in your studies than if you are Mohammed from the 9-3, go to a shit school, in a shit area, have no support whatsoever from your parents, have a poor education, never go in holidays, etc etc etc etc...
No it's not. In fact that is the exact opposite of the definition of "deserving".
I will give you that it's harder for Mohamed du 93 to get a good diploma compared to Jean-Phillipe from Versailles. In fact that's exactly what I said... It's harder, but it's possible and that's what matters.
Yeah it is possible. So the 1% kids who escape their parents condition because they are lucky and have exceptional life justify the fact that the 99% other will have the life they are supposed to have because they are born there: a shit life.
Great.
No, not lucky, but precisely "deserving".
What makes you deserving? Your experience. That's what you don't get.
Our environment makes us what we are. If you are lucky, it turns you end up completely different that what you wre supposed to be given your environment.
For Christ sake, read Bourdieu or any sociology at all.
I'm willing to bet I've read more Bourdieu than anyone on this forum You people need to stop thinking that people with a different opinion then yours are illiterate...
If you do not believe in merit over luck, than there is an ideological barrier that separates us that I'm afraid no amount of post will help overcome.
Maybe one day you'll discover that putting hard work and being deserving is a bit easier if you are Jean Phillipe from Versailles, have wealthy and cultured parents, got a good education, went to a great school, lived in a friendly environment and be supported to death in your studies than if you are Mohammed from the 9-3, go to a shit school, in a shit area, have no support whatsoever from your parents, have a poor education, never go in holidays, etc etc etc etc...
No it's not. In fact that is the exact opposite of the definition of "deserving".
I will give you that it's harder for Mohamed du 93 to get a good diploma compared to Jean-Phillipe from Versailles. In fact that's exactly what I said... It's harder, but it's possible and that's what matters.
Yeah it is possible. So the 1% kids who escape their parents condition because they are lucky and have exceptional life justify the fact that the 99% other will have the life they are supposed to have because they are born there: a shit life.
Great.
No, not lucky, but precisely "deserving".
What makes you deserving? Your experience. That's what you don't get.
Our environment makes us what we are. If you are lucky, it turns you end up completely different that what you wre supposed to be given your environment.
For Christ sake, read Bourdieu or any sociology at all.
People like him reject Bourdieu for "determinism"... lol
You people also need to stop being so condescending
If you read Bourdieu then you would know that it is not ideological but proved statistically.
Maybe one day you'll discover that putting hard work and being deserving is a bit easier if you are Jean Phillipe from Versailles, have wealthy and cultured parents, got a good education, went to a great school, lived in a friendly environment and be supported to death in your studies than if you are Mohammed from the 9-3, go to a shit school, in a shit area, have no support whatsoever from your parents, have a poor education, never go in holidays, etc etc etc etc...
No it's not. In fact that is the exact opposite of the definition of "deserving".
I will give you that it's harder for Mohamed du 93 to get a good diploma compared to Jean-Phillipe from Versailles. In fact that's exactly what I said... It's harder, but it's possible and that's what matters.
Yeah it is possible. So the 1% kids who escape their parents condition because they are lucky and have exceptional life justify the fact that the 99% other will have the life they are supposed to have because they are born there: a shit life.
Great.
No, not lucky, but precisely "deserving".
What makes you deserving? Your experience. That's what you don't get.
Our environment makes us what we are. If you are lucky, it turns you end up completely different that what you wre supposed to be given your environment.
For Christ sake, read Bourdieu or any sociology at all.
I'm willing to bet I've read more Bourdieu than anyone on this forum You people need to stop thinking that people with a different opinion then yours are illiterate...
If you do not believe in merit over luck, than there is an ideological barrier that separates us that I'm afraid no amount of post will help overcome.
I bet Jean Sarkozy was very desrving when he got nominated at the head of the EPAD. lol
Yeah, I think this discussion is useless. I also know people who see a homeless and think "he didn't make any effort taht's why he is there". Usually they don't realize that they had themselves everything to succeed. But hey, it's good to think of ourself that we are doing well because of how awesome we inherently are.
Rejection of social determination is just as old as liberalism, what makes it an unfair ideology. The pathetic justification about the "hard work that pays" and the extraordinary refusal to see that "merit" comes from somewhere and that we were not born deserving or not deserving always puzzled me. I would prefer people like you saying that they are fine with life being completely unfair and admit they don't give a crap about the most vulnerable ones. That would be more honest.
He didn't get nominated at the head of the Epad. And I thought we shouldn't use examples ? Am I the only one here not allowed to give examples ? ^^ I'll say this again, but I would appreciate it if you would stop the ad hominem's. "people like me"... Please don't presume to know me after reading 100 lines of what I had to say on specific subjects. Words such as "pathetic" don't help your cause either. Attaching "pathetic" to an idea you disagree with, with no further explanations is rather insulting. I'm sorry for answering to this in this manner but this is like the 20th judgemental post with personal attacks I read (not necessarily all from you) . I'm trying to respect everyone's opinion and would appreciate it if this discussion remained civil.
No one is born deserving or not, this is the definition of deserving. Making the most out of what life has given to you. If you take away the ideological right for people to earn a status through hard work, you're walking the path of deresponsibilization. Maybe I will offend people when I say this, but there is always an alternative to begging and homelessness which is what you do when you've given up. That doesn't mean that I don't empathize with these people, I understand the hardships they've had to go through, I understand that had they been born in a good family, with rich, caring parents, their life might have been completely different. But I also will fight for the right every man has to be responsible of his own destiny. When that is no longer the case, then I will believe that there is a fundamental problem with society, but today we are very far from it. Anyone with determination and courage can meet any of his objectives, and I won't let anyone tell them that they were doomed to failure from the start because of the family they were born in.
Maybe one day you'll discover that putting hard work and being deserving is a bit easier if you are Jean Phillipe from Versailles, have wealthy and cultured parents, got a good education, went to a great school, lived in a friendly environment and be supported to death in your studies than if you are Mohammed from the 9-3, go to a shit school, in a shit area, have no support whatsoever from your parents, have a poor education, never go in holidays, etc etc etc etc...
No it's not. In fact that is the exact opposite of the definition of "deserving".
I will give you that it's harder for Mohamed du 93 to get a good diploma compared to Jean-Phillipe from Versailles. In fact that's exactly what I said... It's harder, but it's possible and that's what matters.
Yeah it is possible. So the 1% kids who escape their parents condition because they are lucky and have exceptional life justify the fact that the 99% other will have the life they are supposed to have because they are born there: a shit life.
Great.
No, not lucky, but precisely "deserving".
What makes you deserving? Your experience. That's what you don't get.
Our environment makes us what we are. If you are lucky, it turns you end up completely different that what you wre supposed to be given your environment.
For Christ sake, read Bourdieu or any sociology at all.
I'm willing to bet I've read more Bourdieu than anyone on this forum You people need to stop thinking that people with a different opinion then yours are illiterate...
If you do not believe in merit over luck, than there is an ideological barrier that separates us that I'm afraid no amount of post will help overcome.
I bet Jean Sarkozy was very desrving when he got nominated at the head of the EPAD. lol
Yeah, I think this discussion is useless. I also know people who see a homeless and think "he didn't make any effort taht's why he is there". Usually they don't realize that they had themselves everything to succeed. But hey, it's good to think of ourself that we are doing well because of how awesome we inherently are.
Rejection of social determination is just as old as liberalism, what makes it an unfair ideology. The pathetic justification about the "hard work that pays" and the extraordinary refusal to see that "merit" comes from somewhere and that we were not born deserving or not deserving always puzzled me. I would prefer people like you saying that they are fine with life being completely unfair and admit they don't give a crap about the most vulnerable ones. That would be more honest.
He didn't get nominated at the head of the Epad. And I thought we shouldn't use examples ? Am I the only one here not allowed to give examples ? ^^ I'll say this again, but I would appreciate it if you would stop the ad hominem's. "people like me"... Please don't presume to know me after reading 100 lines of what I had to say on specific subjects. Words such as "pathetic" don't help your cause either. Attaching "pathetic" to an idea you disagree with, with no further explanations is rather insulting. I'm sorry for answering to this in this manner but this is like the 20th judgemental post with personal attacks I read (not necessarily all from you) . I'm trying to respect everyone's opinion and would appreciate it if this discussion remained civil.
No one is born deserving or not, this is the definition of deserving. Making the most out of what life has given to you. If you take away the ideological right for people to earn a status through hard work, you're walking the path of deresponsibilization. Maybe I will offend people when I say this, but there is always an alternative to begging and homelessness which is what you do when you've given up. That doesn't mean that I don't empathize with these people, I understand the hardships they've had to go through, I understand that had they been born in a good family, with rich, caring parents, their life might have been completely different. But I also will fight for the right every man has to be responsible of his own destiny. When that is no longer the case, then I will believe that there is a fundamental problem with society, but today we are very far from it. Anyone with determination and courage can meet any of his objectives, and I won't let anyone tell them that they were doomed to failure from the start because of the family they were born in.
No we assume things about you because what you say doesn't make sense at all. You say "Anyone with determination and courage can meet any of his objectives" but if you truly had read Bourdieu you would know that it's just not true, sucess does not come from your "determination and courage" but from what has been given to you by your ancestor through inheritance (not only economical capital, but also cultural, symbolic, social). And I must add that, if you read Boudon, one's objectives is directly linked to his own inheritance too. It is not ideological to say that sucess doesn't come from hard work, it is pure knowledge based on empirical datas.
Maybe one day you'll discover that putting hard work and being deserving is a bit easier if you are Jean Phillipe from Versailles, have wealthy and cultured parents, got a good education, went to a great school, lived in a friendly environment and be supported to death in your studies than if you are Mohammed from the 9-3, go to a shit school, in a shit area, have no support whatsoever from your parents, have a poor education, never go in holidays, etc etc etc etc...
No it's not. In fact that is the exact opposite of the definition of "deserving".
I will give you that it's harder for Mohamed du 93 to get a good diploma compared to Jean-Phillipe from Versailles. In fact that's exactly what I said... It's harder, but it's possible and that's what matters.
Yeah it is possible. So the 1% kids who escape their parents condition because they are lucky and have exceptional life justify the fact that the 99% other will have the life they are supposed to have because they are born there: a shit life.
Great.
No, not lucky, but precisely "deserving".
What makes you deserving? Your experience. That's what you don't get.
Our environment makes us what we are. If you are lucky, it turns you end up completely different that what you wre supposed to be given your environment.
For Christ sake, read Bourdieu or any sociology at all.
I'm willing to bet I've read more Bourdieu than anyone on this forum You people need to stop thinking that people with a different opinion then yours are illiterate...
If you do not believe in merit over luck, than there is an ideological barrier that separates us that I'm afraid no amount of post will help overcome.
I bet Jean Sarkozy was very desrving when he got nominated at the head of the EPAD. lol
Yeah, I think this discussion is useless. I also know people who see a homeless and think "he didn't make any effort taht's why he is there". Usually they don't realize that they had themselves everything to succeed. But hey, it's good to think of ourself that we are doing well because of how awesome we inherently are.
Rejection of social determination is just as old as liberalism, what makes it an unfair ideology. The pathetic justification about the "hard work that pays" and the extraordinary refusal to see that "merit" comes from somewhere and that we were not born deserving or not deserving always puzzled me. I would prefer people like you saying that they are fine with life being completely unfair and admit they don't give a crap about the most vulnerable ones. That would be more honest.
He didn't get nominated at the head of the Epad. And I thought we shouldn't use examples ? Am I the only one here not allowed to give examples ? ^^ I'll say this again, but I would appreciate it if you would stop the ad hominem's. "people like me"... Please don't presume to know me after reading 100 lines of what I had to say on specific subjects. Words such as "pathetic" don't help your cause either. Attaching "pathetic" to an idea you disagree with, with no further explanations is rather insulting. I'm sorry for answering to this in this manner but this is like the 20th judgemental post with personal attacks I read (not necessarily all from you) . I'm trying to respect everyone's opinion and would appreciate it if this discussion remained civil.
No one is born deserving or not, this is the definition of deserving. Making the most out of what life has given to you. If you take away the ideological right for people to earn a status through hard work, you're walking the path of deresponsibilization. Maybe I will offend people when I say this, but there is always an alternative to begging and homelessness which is what you do when you've given up. That doesn't mean that I don't empathize with these people, I understand the hardships they've had to go through, I understand that had they been born in a good family, with rich, caring parents, their life might have been completely different. But I also will fight for the right every man has to be responsible of his own destiny. When that is no longer the case, then I will believe that there is a fundamental problem with society, but today we are very far from it. Anyone with determination and courage can meet any of his objectives, and I won't let anyone tell them that they were doomed to failure from the start because of the family they were born in.
No we assume things about you because what you say doesn't make sense at all. You say "Anyone with determination and courage can meet any of his objectives" but if you truly had read Bourdieu you would know that it's just not true, sucess does not come from your "determination and courage" but from what has been given to you by your ancestor through inheritance (not only economical capital, but also cultural, symbolic, social). And I must add that, if you read Boudon, one's objectives is directly linked to his own inheritance too. It is not ideological to say that sucess doesn't come from hard work, it is pure knowledge based on empirical datas.
You're talking about averages over society, and I'm talking about possibilities offered to a single individual. This is ideology, not statistics. If you want to talk about statistic we can, but it won't be the topic.
On a side note, I can read Bourdieu and not agree with him on everything he says.
Maybe one day you'll discover that putting hard work and being deserving is a bit easier if you are Jean Phillipe from Versailles, have wealthy and cultured parents, got a good education, went to a great school, lived in a friendly environment and be supported to death in your studies than if you are Mohammed from the 9-3, go to a shit school, in a shit area, have no support whatsoever from your parents, have a poor education, never go in holidays, etc etc etc etc...
No it's not. In fact that is the exact opposite of the definition of "deserving".
I will give you that it's harder for Mohamed du 93 to get a good diploma compared to Jean-Phillipe from Versailles. In fact that's exactly what I said... It's harder, but it's possible and that's what matters.
Yeah it is possible. So the 1% kids who escape their parents condition because they are lucky and have exceptional life justify the fact that the 99% other will have the life they are supposed to have because they are born there: a shit life.
Great.
No, not lucky, but precisely "deserving".
What makes you deserving? Your experience. That's what you don't get.
Our environment makes us what we are. If you are lucky, it turns you end up completely different that what you wre supposed to be given your environment.
For Christ sake, read Bourdieu or any sociology at all.
I'm willing to bet I've read more Bourdieu than anyone on this forum You people need to stop thinking that people with a different opinion then yours are illiterate...
If you do not believe in merit over luck, than there is an ideological barrier that separates us that I'm afraid no amount of post will help overcome.
I bet Jean Sarkozy was very desrving when he got nominated at the head of the EPAD. lol
Yeah, I think this discussion is useless. I also know people who see a homeless and think "he didn't make any effort taht's why he is there". Usually they don't realize that they had themselves everything to succeed. But hey, it's good to think of ourself that we are doing well because of how awesome we inherently are.
Rejection of social determination is just as old as liberalism, what makes it an unfair ideology. The pathetic justification about the "hard work that pays" and the extraordinary refusal to see that "merit" comes from somewhere and that we were not born deserving or not deserving always puzzled me. I would prefer people like you saying that they are fine with life being completely unfair and admit they don't give a crap about the most vulnerable ones. That would be more honest.
He didn't get nominated at the head of the Epad. And I thought we shouldn't use examples ? Am I the only one here not allowed to give examples ? ^^ I'll say this again, but I would appreciate it if you would stop the ad hominem's. "people like me"... Please don't presume to know me after reading 100 lines of what I had to say on specific subjects. Words such as "pathetic" don't help your cause either. Attaching "pathetic" to an idea you disagree with, with no further explanations is rather insulting. I'm sorry for answering to this in this manner but this is like the 20th judgemental post with personal attacks I read (not necessarily all from you) . I'm trying to respect everyone's opinion and would appreciate it if this discussion remained civil.
No one is born deserving or not, this is the definition of deserving. Making the most out of what life has given to you. If you take away the ideological right for people to earn a status through hard work, you're walking the path of deresponsibilization. Maybe I will offend people when I say this, but there is always an alternative to begging and homelessness which is what you do when you've given up. That doesn't mean that I don't empathize with these people, I understand the hardships they've had to go through, I understand that had they been born in a good family, with rich, caring parents, their life might have been completely different. But I also will fight for the right every man has to be responsible of his own destiny. When that is no longer the case, then I will believe that there is a fundamental problem with society, but today we are very far from it. Anyone with determination and courage can meet any of his objectives, and I won't let anyone tell them that they were doomed to failure from the start because of the family they were born in.
No we assume things about you because what you say doesn't make sense at all. You say "Anyone with determination and courage can meet any of his objectives" but if you truly had read Bourdieu you would know that it's just not true, sucess does not come from your "determination and courage" but from what has been given to you by your ancestor through inheritance (not only economical capital, but also cultural, symbolic, social). And I must add that, if you read Boudon, one's objectives is directly linked to his own inheritance too. It is not ideological to say that sucess doesn't come from hard work, it is pure knowledge based on empirical datas.
You're talking about averages over society, and I'm talking about possibilities offered to a single individual. This is ideology, not statistics. If you want to talk about statistic we can, but it won't be the topic.
On a side note, I can read Bourdieu and not agree with him on everything he says.
Nobody agree with Bourdieu on everything, but regarding the question we are discussing, everybody agrees with him : social mobility is marginal, it's not even Bourdieu who made that clear.
Individually you can believe that you have possibilities of course, but the odds are not about "average" but more like 98% of chance to reproduce your father's position in the social hierarchy. It's a fact.
Being deserving in life is not necessarily having sucess, that is ideological. For me someone that is deserving is someone who respected his promise, did what he intended no matter what kind of pression he had on him, etc. I'm sorry but saying that someone in the street could have done something to get out is just flat out stupid.
On May 03 2012 02:51 Biff The Understudy wrote: I am the one who will get the money, and who will pay willingly a big percentage of it to this country
Funnily enough, you nailed the "willingly" that you get in communist countries.
What, yeah, I'll always pay my tax willingly. Because I know that they are necessary for this country.
But hey, you see someone who doesn't think egoistically and doesn't just think of his wealth and his little short term interest, and we are in Bolchevikland, right?
Here we go again, haha, left wing = generous humanists and right wing = selfish pricks. That's so fantasticly dumb that I'm not sure why I even bother trying to argue against people who can only resort to the worst fallacies. It's quite comparable to the idiotic religious people who feel good about themselves because they know "they're the good guys" and try to convert you for your own sake. Not gonna elaborate on where you seem naively that your "willingly paid tax money" goes, that's just delusional, and accepting the inevitable doesn't make you a generous hero, it just makes you the average citizen who isn't frauding.
No it's not. In fact that is the exact opposite of the definition of "deserving".
I will give you that it's harder for Mohamed du 93 to get a good diploma compared to Jean-Phillipe from Versailles. In fact that's exactly what I said... It's harder, but it's possible and that's what matters.
Yeah it is possible. So the 1% kids who escape their parents condition because they are lucky and have exceptional life justify the fact that the 99% other will have the life they are supposed to have because they are born there: a shit life.
Great.
No, not lucky, but precisely "deserving".
What makes you deserving? Your experience. That's what you don't get.
Our environment makes us what we are. If you are lucky, it turns you end up completely different that what you wre supposed to be given your environment.
For Christ sake, read Bourdieu or any sociology at all.
I'm willing to bet I've read more Bourdieu than anyone on this forum You people need to stop thinking that people with a different opinion then yours are illiterate...
If you do not believe in merit over luck, than there is an ideological barrier that separates us that I'm afraid no amount of post will help overcome.
I bet Jean Sarkozy was very desrving when he got nominated at the head of the EPAD. lol
Yeah, I think this discussion is useless. I also know people who see a homeless and think "he didn't make any effort taht's why he is there". Usually they don't realize that they had themselves everything to succeed. But hey, it's good to think of ourself that we are doing well because of how awesome we inherently are.
Rejection of social determination is just as old as liberalism, what makes it an unfair ideology. The pathetic justification about the "hard work that pays" and the extraordinary refusal to see that "merit" comes from somewhere and that we were not born deserving or not deserving always puzzled me. I would prefer people like you saying that they are fine with life being completely unfair and admit they don't give a crap about the most vulnerable ones. That would be more honest.
He didn't get nominated at the head of the Epad. And I thought we shouldn't use examples ? Am I the only one here not allowed to give examples ? ^^ I'll say this again, but I would appreciate it if you would stop the ad hominem's. "people like me"... Please don't presume to know me after reading 100 lines of what I had to say on specific subjects. Words such as "pathetic" don't help your cause either. Attaching "pathetic" to an idea you disagree with, with no further explanations is rather insulting. I'm sorry for answering to this in this manner but this is like the 20th judgemental post with personal attacks I read (not necessarily all from you) . I'm trying to respect everyone's opinion and would appreciate it if this discussion remained civil.
No one is born deserving or not, this is the definition of deserving. Making the most out of what life has given to you. If you take away the ideological right for people to earn a status through hard work, you're walking the path of deresponsibilization. Maybe I will offend people when I say this, but there is always an alternative to begging and homelessness which is what you do when you've given up. That doesn't mean that I don't empathize with these people, I understand the hardships they've had to go through, I understand that had they been born in a good family, with rich, caring parents, their life might have been completely different. But I also will fight for the right every man has to be responsible of his own destiny. When that is no longer the case, then I will believe that there is a fundamental problem with society, but today we are very far from it. Anyone with determination and courage can meet any of his objectives, and I won't let anyone tell them that they were doomed to failure from the start because of the family they were born in.
No we assume things about you because what you say doesn't make sense at all. You say "Anyone with determination and courage can meet any of his objectives" but if you truly had read Bourdieu you would know that it's just not true, sucess does not come from your "determination and courage" but from what has been given to you by your ancestor through inheritance (not only economical capital, but also cultural, symbolic, social). And I must add that, if you read Boudon, one's objectives is directly linked to his own inheritance too. It is not ideological to say that sucess doesn't come from hard work, it is pure knowledge based on empirical datas.
You're talking about averages over society, and I'm talking about possibilities offered to a single individual. This is ideology, not statistics. If you want to talk about statistic we can, but it won't be the topic.
On a side note, I can read Bourdieu and not agree with him on everything he says.
I'm sorry but saying that someone in the street could have done something to get out is just flat out stupid.
I guess we'll leave it at that.
Because your ad hominems are getting tiring ("stupid" really? ) Because I do indeed believe that someone in the street could have done something to get out. so we seem to have reached an idological wall. Because the debate is starting
On May 03 2012 02:51 Biff The Understudy wrote: I am the one who will get the money, and who will pay willingly a big percentage of it to this country
Funnily enough, you nailed the "willingly" that you get in communist countries.
What, yeah, I'll always pay my tax willingly. Because I know that they are necessary for this country.
But hey, you see someone who doesn't think egoistically and doesn't just think of his wealth and his little short term interest, and we are in Bolchevikland, right?
Here we go again, haha, left wing = generous humanists and right wing = selfish pricks. That's so fantasticly dumb that I'm not sure why I even bother trying to argue against people who can only resort to the worst fallacies. It's quite comparable to the idiotic religious people who feel good about themselves because they know "they're the good guys" and try to convert you for your own sake. Not gonna elaborate on where you seem naively that your "willingly paid tax money" goes, that's just delusional, and accepting the inevitable doesn't make you a generous hero, it just makes you the average citizen who isn't frauding.
Sorry I say I am willing to pay taxes on my grand parents huge inheritage, you say that is bolshevik.
You are the caricature. Yes I am willing to pay taxes. For you it's delusional. It's not that I am a hero. It's that you can't understand something as basic as the fact that as a citizen, I believe I should pay taxes accordingly to my wealth and income. No need to say you are the bad one. It's enough to let you say what you ahve to say and draw the conclusion. You can't imagine an other way to think than egoistic calculation, that's fine.
My father is a CEO. He votes against his direct interest since 30 years. Maybe he is a bolshevik too?
Ok, Sarkozy is being pedantic and pretentious. Hollande is insisting too much on Sarkozy's results. Nothing new except that big "i know more inaccurate figures than you" debate. I'm out. Those two are pretty evenly matched in a debate... This will not turn the tide of the campaign.
On May 03 2012 02:51 Biff The Understudy wrote: I am the one who will get the money, and who will pay willingly a big percentage of it to this country
Funnily enough, you nailed the "willingly" that you get in communist countries.
What, yeah, I'll always pay my tax willingly. Because I know that they are necessary for this country.
But hey, you see someone who doesn't think egoistically and doesn't just think of his wealth and his little short term interest, and we are in Bolchevikland, right?
Here we go again, haha, left wing = generous humanists and right wing = selfish pricks. That's so fantasticly dumb that I'm not sure why I even bother trying to argue against people who can only resort to the worst fallacies. It's quite comparable to the idiotic religious people who feel good about themselves because they know "they're the good guys" and try to convert you for your own sake. Not gonna elaborate on where you seem naively that your "willingly paid tax money" goes, that's just delusional, and accepting the inevitable doesn't make you a generous hero, it just makes you the average citizen who isn't frauding.
Sorry I say I am willing to pay taxes on my grand parents huge inheritage, you say that is bolshevik.
You are the caricature. Yes I am willing to pay taxes. For you it's delusional. It's not that I am a hero. It's that you can't understand something as basic as the fact that as a citizen, I believe I should pay taxes accordingly to my wealth and income. No need to say you are the bad one. It's enough to let you say what you ahve to say and draw the conclusion. You can't imagine an other way to think than egoistic calculation, that's fine.
My father is a CEO. He votes against his direct interest since 30 years. Maybe he is a bolshevik too?
If its willingly, then its not a tax. That's what separates taxation from payments, or remunerations. I frankly don't care if you donate your whole estate and all your property to the State, but you have no right or authority to do so from other individuals.
A lot of folks work and save so they can give to their children a better life than they had. You think parents shouldn't be able to pass hardly anything down to their children..and I'm not sure if that constitutes all properties (houses, cars, land, cultural works (paintings, etc.), businesses, etc.), or merely money in your mind. Inheritance taxes usually tax a persons entire estate, which means that in many cases families are forced to sell their businesses to pay the taxes, and thus, businesses are destroyed and families are worse off.
It hardly does society any good to destroy wealth creating businesses, but the folks for the inheritance tax never look at these costs. I let Milton do a little talking:
As for the argument that inheritance lends itself to aristocracy is a misconception. Aristocracies arise from insulation from competition, done so by State-authorities. Taking money and property from one person and family to give to the State does nothing to ameliorate the conditions which induce poverty. Repealing patent and copyrights, the regulatory and administrative state, & the Welfare/Warfare State with a likewise elimination of taxation would provide a far more equitable environment for the best and brightest who contribute the most to society to become wealthy.
I certainly am against the redistribution of wealth wherever it may be, and that of course means to the rich and wealthy who are very undeserving of their status. This means folks like Jeffry Immelt and the lot @ GE. The CEO and folks at places like Northrop Grumman & the monsters who rake the taxpayers like the folks who make the body scanners (Chertoff's lot) to sell to the Government, as well as the large firms like Microsoft & Apple who benefit immensely from patent and copyrights.
However, Progressives don't care about how you made your money, only that you have money and they are some of the most envious spiteful folks I've come across. There's a just way to make your money by purely voluntary means, and an unjust way by graft, thievery, and artificial advantage writ large from State-violence and monopoly.
Society is not the Government, and the Government is not society. That's all 'leftists' and 'rightists' look at the Government as -- one giant social engineering instrument and they fight over it's control, to everyone else's detriment. I think Aaron Russo explains it best:
EPT
You people need to stop thinking that people with a different opinion then yours are illiterate...
