Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Sep 2011
- Posts
- 6,134
- Location
- melee island
Well said ^^ 

What a well structured, evidence based argument...
This,Who has promoted the idea that equality is defined in terms of outcome? I have only heard serious arguments in favour of equality being based upon the importance of an equal starting position, regardless of the lives of the individual's parents. It is on the basis of the equality of the beginning, that the inequality of the finish is legitimised.
Also, equality is not sameness.
Do you have any facts or figures to support this, or do we just take this as fact that "I have worked with people who seem to live and breathe socialism, equality and self-entitlement. " as evidence that your experience is indicative of the wider population?.I have worked with people who seem to live and breathe socialism, equality and self-entitlement.
A small few are genuinely in it to selflessly help others and promote equality, having no regard to their own income, self-importance, well-being and health. These same people are also the ones who also get ‘used’ by those, above and around them, that push the equality & entitlement agendas to further their causes. They simply become pawns or employees in a low-income game and they just don’t see it, because, they innocently or ignorantly believe everyone working with and around them sees the world with their eyes.
The rest and majority who promote these agendas simply hate successful people with money, whether this is bankers, business men or just those that inherit wealth, and it is out of nothing but envy with the “I can’t have it so why should you” or “you may be more intelligent than me but why should this benefit you”. Make no mistake, a lot of these people are in it for their ego, social status, popularity and scoial standing so ultimately themselves, the only difference is they just earn less.
Do you have any facts or figures to support this, or do we just take this as fact that "I have worked with people who seem to live and breathe socialism, equality and self-entitlement. " as evidence that your experience is indicative of the wider population?.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
So what you are basically saying is "what I just said was only meant to be a vague description of a few people I know" - please ignore it.I have nothing to justify or back up here.
This is to be read as written, it wasn't a blanket statement, it was in relation to my experiences and those I have worked with.
You made the assumption that this is indicative of a wider population not me. If that is how you want to read it then feel free to go away and come back with some evidence to support your theory.
Maybe it stems from the fact that everybody is entitled to certain things and that many of those entitlements are described in law?
I used to be a PR man and did a lot of work with lawyers and corporate types. Some of them were the smartest and most sensible people I have ever met and deserved their success, but most were nothing special and a substantial minority were insufferably arrogant without the talent to compensate. Their professional success could only be attributed to their background - white, southern English and privately schooled - as they never displayed any real intelligence or an aptitude for anything other than advancing their own careers.The rest and majority who promote these agendas simply hate successful people with money, whether this is bankers, business men or just those that inherit wealth, and it is out of nothing but envy with the “I can’t have it so why should you” or “you may be more intelligent than me but why should this benefit you”.
Labour.