| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sugar
Guru
Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 7:00 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Prenj wrote: | | sugar wrote: | It couldn't be further from Entitlementism. In fact, the concept of Earnianism is the opposite of Entitlementism, as no-one is entitled to anything, unless they work* for it. There is only one rule, however.
| Quote: | | If it is not earned, then it is not deserved. |
No one is entitled to anything without earning the right though work.
*I've defined 'work' as any contribution towards the inputs of the production of goods and services. Contribution capital is an input, and so people should be rewarded, as it is deserved. |
Yeah but you are still stuck in binary mindset where you assume that some people "work" and that some "don't".
In reality, everybody involved in a project feels that they worked their asses off, while other guys just worked a little bit. It is subjective, and ego tells us that we are right. Then we feel entitled to things. You cannot construct a society which doesnt take into consideration basic aspects of human psyche (see marxism and why it fails), nor can you change human psyche to fit into society (you end up with gutless people branded as "normal", and normal people branded as "immoral" (see any totalitarian regime).
Who is gonna police your society and check who earned and who didn't? And who is gonna police the police, because they are people too, and subjective to flattery, bribe, discrimination, prejudice etc etc.
In truth, sugar, YOU are just not prepared to deal with reality as it is, you're scared of big bad world  |
read the * at the bottom where I define 'work'. I have bolded it.
and I don't know how it will be policed. This is the reason for this thread. I'm trying to flesh out this concept. I am neither supporting it, nor defending it, only working through it as a problem.
_________________
Sensory Sugar
A call for full employment is a call for war!
New Zealand: Out gay-ing the rest of the planet since 2012. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Prenj
n00b
Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 4
Location: Mostar, BiH
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ok, again. You cannot define "work" as binary. What do you mean "any input"? The only thing you are saying is that if a person works it should get payed, and that goes without saying. You are not addressing the issue of "HOW MUCH", and by not doing that this whole "concept" of yours is rubbish.
What is going on here in this thread is you deciding on your own that you have "a cunning plan", much like Baldrick in Black Adder. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sugar
Guru
Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 7:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Prenj wrote: | Ok, again. You cannot define "work" as binary. What do you mean "any input"? The only thing you are saying is that if a person works it should get payed, and that goes without saying. You are not addressing the issue of "HOW MUCH", and by not doing that this whole "concept" of yours is rubbish.
What is going on here in this thread is you deciding on your own that you have "a cunning plan", much like Baldrick in Black Adder. |
Inputs = raw materials, labour, capital, utilites.
The issue of how much shall be defined by the market. The Earnian doesn't care.
And, the cunning plan is the flesh this out, and then try and pass this nonsense off as reasonable socio-economic theory with it's foundations being this thread on this forum.
_________________
Sensory Sugar
A call for full employment is a call for war!
New Zealand: Out gay-ing the rest of the planet since 2012. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Prenj
n00b
Joined: 20 Nov 2011
Posts: 4
Location: Mostar, BiH
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 7:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sugar wrote: | | The Earnian doesn't care. |
Well, then there is nothing wrong with the system as it is today. Congrats. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sugar
Guru
Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Prenj wrote: | | sugar wrote: | | The Earnian doesn't care. |
Well, then there is nothing wrong with the system as it is today. Congrats. |
If I can find a way to ban gifts of any kind, then I can be an economic concept. The less authoritarian, the better.
Without that, it's just a socio-political concept.
_________________
Sensory Sugar
A call for full employment is a call for war!
New Zealand: Out gay-ing the rest of the planet since 2012. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 128
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2011 8:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's not hard. Everybody has to file tax returns...
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sugar
Guru
Joined: 07 Aug 2004
Posts: 579
Location: Morrinsville, New Zealand
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2012 6:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
I was thinking about earnianism the other day.
Lets say I win the lottery. Did I earn the winnings? Does just participating in a market justify any gain, no matter how large, I get from the market? Should the earnianist thinker reason that the real winners of any lottery product are the organisers of the lottery, and not really the winners. No other 'product' creates such a large separation of experiences for it's consumers.
It feels like it should be something that should be seriously considered by the Earnianist. But maybe it shouldn't. Maybe earning money through your own sweat AND through just dumb luck is Earnian, as people experience poor luck and good fortune all through their lives. It's just a natural variability; the background noise to Earnianism, that can be ignored.
_________________
Sensory Sugar
A call for full employment is a call for war!
New Zealand: Out gay-ing the rest of the planet since 2012. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mcgruff
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 128
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2012 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As I see it, the fundamental Earnian principle is equality of opportunity. A lottery grants high rewards to an individual but everyone has an equal opportunity to win so I'd be pretty relaxed about it. It could be a good way to raise money for good causes.
The mechanism for redistributing wealth could itself be implemented as a lottery. I'd probably prefer an element of choice so you can choose if you want land, or shares, or some kind of mixture of whatever is available.
It could be that the whole idea of a lottery loses its appeal in an Earnian society. If wealth and power are more evenly distributed, that should lead to decent health care, education, housing, etc for all. If "ordinary" life is already pretty good, there's no need for a means of escape.
_________________
the underlay overlay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Off the Wall
