What is "Social Justice"?
Gracie - Proud Conservative
2012/06/30 22:01:02
It's everywhere, it's everywhere! You hear it, you see it, they talk about it, but do you really know what it is?
Give me a short synopsis of what you think it is.
Give me a short synopsis of what you think it is.
Top Opinion
-
Farnsworth 2012/06/30 22:12:04
Look here at what we do and very quickly you say "What's wrong with this picture?!
I don't think anything should be achieved by force. Not social policy, certainly not foreign policy.
What we're doing is using social and economic planning and there is no such thing as a man or men intelligent enough, impartial enough or capable of dictating social strata without destroying merit.
In the name of diversity we've degraded ourselves to a Mediocracy. We've completely destroyed merit.
As for turning things over to the "invisible hand of the market" entirely, that is simply a return to feudalism. With the concentration of wealth that already exists, there can be no free markets for the markets will always be vulnerable to manipulation by the few. Sorry, but I will not count on the good conscience and high ethics of the ruling aristocracy to determine our fates.
Look how Obamacare is doing to do exactly what you say you don't want to happen, men deciding our fates by our ranking. Senior citizens and children don't rank highly.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not endorsing the pseudo liberal crap pushed by the Democratic Party. I've no regard for Obama or Obamacare, but without some kind of regulation under the control of the people as a whole you will the very worst of human nature expressed, not some benign, detached 'free hand' guiding economics. The problem as I said is not regulation per se, it is the failure of the public to properly oversee the regulation government applies. For example, the EPA is not a bad thing conceptually, but as implemented it is more about protecting corporate interests from civil liability that it is about protecting the environment from corporate destructiveness.
The thing about all the regulating agencies is there are a framework for controlling everything without as much as a vote by Congress. Most of the agencies like both DOE's drain money and kill the things they were meant to improve.
You've all got corporataphobia and I see it as government conspiring with them to pick who will win and who will lose. Our complicated tax code is responsible for crony capitalism. Simplify the tax code, do away with unnecessary subsidies and let the losers lose and the winners win. Competition is a good thing, profit is necessary. Corporations aren't evil, men are.
So too are my thoughts on the tax code, any reasonable person could come up with a fair and viable tax code that covers one or two pages, the only thing we get from thousands of pages of it is employment for tax lawyers, and a million and one loopholes that benefit corporations and the upper income earners only.
As with anything, the best results overall are achieved with a balance between competing interests is met. And in the end it always comes back to a common thread, at least in democratic nations. The voters have simply been negligent in overseeing government. We continuously endorse men and women in government who have not served our interests.
I think where you and I differ in outlook is that in my opinion at least with government we have the ability to hold it accountable. We do not as a whole, but the mechanism is there should people choose to make good use of it. With corporations, they are beholden to nobody but their shareholders. And if left unrestrained they will run amok and through collusion amongst themselves they will plunder the populace and turn your Republic into an outright feudal state.
Bad businesses should go out of business and make way for those who can succeed. When airlines were deregulated the airline industry didn't go away...the strong survived and the weak died. One bankrupt business makes way for another.
When government intervenes you prop up the unproductive at the expense of the entire industry. It's not leveling the playing field, it's picking the winners and making sure they win. This is how you corrupt politicians.
It should also be noted that if not for the repeal of the regulation which separated investment banking from the banks covered by FDIC there would have been no need for government to step in to protect the public's savings. A clear cut example of deregulation failing, a clear example of how the markets will operate if left to police themselves. Sure, you can say that the strong would have survived and the weak fallen if left without intervention, but the truth of that is that in the falling the plunderers would have their booty tucked away and the people would be left holding the empty bag.
Believe me Gracie, I am not in favor of government propping up failing business. But I se...
It should also be noted that if not for the repeal of the regulation which separated investment banking from the banks covered by FDIC there would have been no need for government to step in to protect the public's savings. A clear cut example of deregulation failing, a clear example of how the markets will operate if left to police themselves. Sure, you can say that the strong would have survived and the weak fallen if left without intervention, but the truth of that is that in the falling the plunderers would have their booty tucked away and the people would be left holding the empty bag.
Believe me Gracie, I am not in favor of government propping up failing business. But I see governments primary responsibility as serving the public interest. And just because previous government misadventure is to blame for the a crisis, that does not absolve it from responsibility to protect the public from harm. GM and Chrysler should have been allowed to fail because they were failing because of poor business models. The savings banks needed to be saved because they were going to fail because of failed government oversight and the public needed to be protected from that.
You reference the airlines and how they didn't go away with deregulation. That is true, but they are still a very regulated industry. If left entirely to the "invisible hand" we would still have airlines, but none of them would be American companies and none of the profits generated would stay in America. You would be flying exclusively on foreign airlines in poorly maintained aircraft serviced by underpaid staff. You spoke earlier of "corporataphobia", but there is a great deal of 'regulataphobia' from the right when in fact it is only the little bits of regulation left which has kept any aspects of the economy alive. With a complete "invisible hand" approach there would not be one single corporate headquarters in America, nor would there be a single job not outsourced if at all possible.
Have you seen either of these pieces?
I must say Gracie, I'm quite enjoying this discussion with you.
I just ordered it so you know I'm serious! I truly love economics, who would have thought that when I was younger, although I was an accounting major.
you describe justice...
not social justice-
we already have that...
even if it is imperfectly applied-
but you described justice-
the extra word "social" is loaded-
it is thru social issues...
that principle has been eclipsed-
and thru social justice...
the simple principle of justice...
is eclipsed-
see the pattern???
are for society to address-
not govt-
society is not a synonym for govt-