Classroom Socialism..

  • Thread starter Thread starter vkurup
  • Start date Start date
V

vkurup

Guest
(Found this on Facetube et al, dont know source or authenticity, but makes good reading)

An economics teacher at a local school made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Gillard/Brown socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.

The teacher then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on the Gillard/Brown plan". All grades will
be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (Substituting grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by all).

After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.

The second test average was a D! No one was happy.

When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.

To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the teacher told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, and gives to those who do nothing, no-one will try Or want to succeed.

It could NOT be any simpler than that.

Remember, there IS a test coming up. --->> The next election. These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable to this experiment:


1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

--------------------------

It does oversimiplify and makes some assumptions, but I must say that I agree with the bullets at the end. Thoughts?
 
Excellent is my thought .. we like most countries are going through a rough time , i keep saying you cant keep taxing the few that are working to supliment the ones with no jobs .. (this is not a dig at unemployed people by the way, its a dig at the government) the more money i have in my pocket , the more i spend , creating or at least saving current jobs .. the less i have , the less i spend , shops get less & close or let people off .. If reward for work was greater then more people would want to work (provided there were jobs created)

Love points 2,3 & 5
 
I don't agree, it's a classroom situation where the result is one that seems to scratch the itch of the people wanting said outcome. Effectively no different than applying h/caps to golfers to even the field when in reality we know that some golfers are better than others. I'd still want 50% of £1M than a free handout of £10K and no job.
 
Beautiful logic,and true.
I get very annoyed that government promotes and people believe that it is the government that spends it's money for this and that. No, it is the taxpayer who 'has the money' and has little say how it is spent. It's lovely spending other peoples money!
Not only do governments spend the tax take they also overspend it. At which point we go overdrawn and have to pay the interest.
 
I don't agree, it's a classroom situation where the result is one that seems to scratch the itch of the people wanting said outcome. Effectively no different than applying h/caps to golfers to even the field when in reality we know that some golfers are better than others. I'd still want 50% of £1M than a free handout of £10K and no job.

If you put in 80% of the work & me 20% of the work to earn the million , you would be ok with geting 50% each ??
 
In a financial situation yes I would. It happens all the time... it's called WORK.

Does the CEO at British Gas work harder than a guy on the road fitting boilers all day? I bet the guy fitting boilers wouldn't mind sharing the pot with his boss even if he does work harder for it.
 
Typical right wing nonsense. These fairy stories have to be written in a rather simplistic manner so their target audience can understand them.

Socialism has got plenty of hard working people a living wage and decent working conditions. You could rewrite this little story such that one or two of the class stole everyone's money and weren't held to account for it.

The idea of supply side economics (aka trickle down economics) has now been shown to be nonsense, and giving money to less well off people who then spend it does far more for the economy than giving bail outs to bankers who made losing bets with other peoples money.
 
In a financial situation yes I would. It happens all the time... it's called WORK.

Does the CEO at British Gas work harder than a guy on the road fitting boilers all day? I bet the guy fitting boilers wouldn't mind sharing the pot with his boss even if he does work harder for it.

Spot on JO.
 
Typical right wing nonsense. These fairy stories have to be written in a rather simplistic manner so their target audience can understand them.

Socialism has got plenty of hard working people a living wage and decent working conditions. You could rewrite this little story such that one or two of the class stole everyone's money and weren't held to account for it.

The idea of supply side economics (aka trickle down economics) has now been shown to be nonsense, and giving money to less well off people who then spend it does far more for the economy than giving bail outs to bankers who made losing bets with other peoples money.

Ethan,
Whenever the topic concerns Custom fitting we seem to have differing views,however when it comes to politics and/or ethics,we seem to sing from the same hymn book.
Excellent post.
 
Doesnt this happen already under our current system?
yes you are bang on.
I didnt say it doesnt happen tho , im asking are you/people alright with it ?.. im asking regarding people of the same job responabilities & positions within a business , i do apreciate there are different levels of skill & management & pay structures etc ..

If you and i were in the company the same lenght of time , same qualifications , same hours etc , we have a specific job to do .. you do 80% i do 20% we get paid the same .. seems to stink doesnt it .. surely the guy doing 80% has no incentive to do so on the next job ..
 
.. surely the guy doing 80% has no incentive to do so on the next job ..

surely he's got the capacity to negotiate a better deal for himself.

re the OP it seems like a over simplistic justification to vote republican. Seems to miss the point that any society is judged by how the less well off are catered for. That includes the rich paying proportionally more. Otherwise you create a disenfranchised underclass, see the events of Aug 2011 as to what can happen then.
 
Typical right wing nonsense. These fairy stories have to be written in a rather simplistic manner so their target audience can understand them.

Socialism has got plenty of hard working people a living wage and decent working conditions. You could rewrite this little story such that one or two of the class stole everyone's money and weren't held to account for it.

The idea of supply side economics (aka trickle down economics) has now been shown to be nonsense, and giving money to less well off people who then spend it does far more for the economy than giving bail outs to bankers who made losing bets with other peoples money.

Well said Ethan
Cheers
Pete
 
Typical right wing nonsense. These fairy stories have to be written in a rather simplistic manner so their target audience can understand them.

Socialism has got plenty of hard working people a living wage and decent working conditions. You could rewrite this little story such that one or two of the class stole everyone's money and weren't held to account for it.

The idea of supply side economics (aka trickle down economics) has now been shown to be nonsense, and giving money to less well off people who then spend it does far more for the economy than giving bail outs to bankers who made losing bets with other peoples money.

Nicely put.

Can I just add that there has to be an element of Socialism in society or those that can't do, e.g. the old, infirm, disabled or from the poorest of backgrounds, will not have any life at all. Taken to the nth degree, Hitler made sure there was a place for those who couldn't...
 
Typical right wing nonsense. These fairy stories have to be written in a rather simplistic manner so their target audience can understand them.

Socialism has got plenty of hard working people a living wage and decent working conditions. You could rewrite this little story such that one or two of the class stole everyone's money and weren't held to account for it.

The idea of supply side economics (aka trickle down economics) has now been shown to be nonsense, and giving money to less well off people who then spend it does far more for the economy than giving bail outs to bankers who made losing bets with other peoples money.

While I agree this is not a perfect story and Romney might love it, I dont want to rubbish the whole thing as 'right wing nonsense'. It is very simplistic and makes assumption. Also not really socialism as it is more communist in its approach.

While Socialism does work the trickle down economics is a bit of "If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows." - only works if you are the horse.
 
Socialism works? Eh? Where?

Socialism (like capitalism) needs to evolve and adapt to new realities. China is probably the biggest example of market socialism which seems to be doing alright. Despite all the noise about cheap labour and bad working conditions, it has lifted millions out of poverty over the past decade and is increasingly on its way to rule the world. It has used a mix of state and private enterprise to achieve it. Vietnam is looking at that model too. A firm I used to work for, recently opened another centre in Vietnam to get 'ahead of the curve'

Closer home, everyone seems to be loving John Lewis - a model for 'social enterprise' - again using a mix of social and capitalistic strategies.
 
Nicely put.

Can I just add that there has to be an element of Socialism in society or those that can't do, e.g. the old, infirm, disabled or from the poorest of backgrounds, will not have any life at all. Taken to the nth degree, Hitler made sure there was a place for those who couldn't...

Except for the gypsies, Jewish,mentally ill and communists who he slaughtered.
 
"Taxes are the subscription you pay to live in a civilised society" and it is a generally recognised principle in economics that money taken by Government and spent can generate up to 70% more wealth for the wider economy.
 
Top