You are not signed in (Login or Join Free)   |   Help
Sploofus Trivia
Trivia GamesCommunityLeaderboardsTournaments
You are here:  Home  >>  Chat Forums  >>  The Salty Dog  >>  View Chat Message

View Chat Message

Pages:  1    

Bushyfox  (Level: 174.4 - Posts: 2403)
Fri, 27th Mar '09 4:58 PM


(Copied from an e-mail)

An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single student, but had once failed an entire class.

The class (students) insisted that socialism worked since no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism.

"All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A."

After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who had studied hard and actually earned an A were upset when the grades were averaged, while the students who had studied very little were happy.

But, as the second test rolled around, the students who had studied little studied even less and the ones who had studied hard decided that since they couldn't make an A, they also studied less. The second test average was a D.

No one was happy. When the 3rd test rolled around the average grade was an F.

The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone else.

To their great surprise, all failed. The professor told them that socialism would ultimately fail because the harder people try to succeed, the greater their reward (capitalism), but when a government takes all the reward away (socialism) no one will try or succeed.

Now, what happened to the global economy in recent months? Can someone please explain this in Socialist/Capitalist terms?

....OK that's enough, start thinking again....

Caramel1  (Level: 135.1 - Posts: 21589)
Fri, 27th Mar '09 5:22 PM

Great post, Bev-Linda

1mks  (Level: 219.5 - Posts: 5925)
Fri, 27th Mar '09 5:25 PM

Smart professor. I got that same e-mail. All the way from Texas to Australia. What a deal!

Collioure  (Level: 113.7 - Posts: 9952)
Fri, 27th Mar '09 5:27 PM

I don't think you can reduce it to socialist/capitalist terms.

If socialism is represented by the federal government and capitalism by the private sector incl Wall St, both failed in several ways.

Surreyman  (Level: 272.4 - Posts: 2771)
Sat, 28th Mar '09 4:56 AM

Sounds like another of those typically simplistic emails circulated by extreme right-wingers - which illustrates how simplistically they think.
Before one of them shoots me with his 'God-given right' gun, the same also applies to the equally simplistic thinking of extreme left-wingers.
'Controlled capitalism' seems to be the best of both worlds.
The current financial mess appears to show that the USA had nowhere near ample controls, and the UK (although closer to that ideal) also still needs to control more closely, and is intending to.
We've all seen what happens to communist or laisser-faire governments.
Unbelievable that some still seem to favour one or t'other.

Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4593)
Sat, 28th Mar '09 7:24 AM

Surrey - I think the way government mishandles things and money is MUCH worse than what the banks and stock market folks have done.

More control and regulation by folks that have never owned a business? I'm against it totally. Let the marketplace and the consumer do the controlling naturally. That's what capitalism is.

Anything the government touches turns to ...well, maybe not manure, but definitely not flowers. There is very little evidence of anything the government does being run well. Bureaucracy and red tape does nothing but cost more and create MORE problems, not fewer. Much as I feel about illegal drug usage. People might start messing with illegal drugs to try to mask their problems. But all it REALLY does it create one more MUCH LARGER problem.

The government is not the answer. The government is just one more much larger problem.

Surreyman  (Level: 272.4 - Posts: 2771)
Sat, 28th Mar '09 7:47 AM

" Let the marketplace and the consumer do the controlling naturally. That's what capitalism is."

Isn't that what got us into this mess?
The untrammelled greed of both capitalists and consumers?
And let those who are financially defenceless suffer?

Collioure  (Level: 113.7 - Posts: 9952)
Sat, 28th Mar '09 8:09 AM

Irresponsible corporate behavior, foolish government policy and lack of government oversight, Alan.

All three.

Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4593)
Sat, 28th Mar '09 8:09 AM

But remember it was the U.S. government who pressured (forced? Barnie Franks) banks to lend for mortgages to people who could not afford them. If the government had stayed out of it, banks would not have done that. That began this mess of dominos that keep falling with increasing speed.

Many forces are involved, and much is self-adjusting and cyclical. If the government stays out of it, the marketplace has a chance to stabilize and then regrow. A lot of what is happening now is articifial.

There are banks now refusing to take bailout money because of the strings attached. Good grief - if they can do without it, they don't need a bailout nor deserve one! That is the government interfering.

When there are irresponsible or just plain bad business practices, a business SHOULD be allowed to fail - to file bankruptcy, restructure, cut out the fat, get rid of some officers, and bring in new people who will return the business to fiscal health. When the government interferes with that process, it's like putting a bandaid on gangrene. Worse, it rewards the irresponsible practices, which now have government carte blanche to continue as usual - which will merely prolong the same thing that got them into their mess.

That's not capitalism. Capitalism results in the restructuring an unhealthy business needs to survive and be stronger. Nothing improves without motivation. The government takes away all motivation to improve.

Surreyman  (Level: 272.4 - Posts: 2771)
Sat, 28th Mar '09 8:57 AM

Agreed, Collioure.
I was referring to Jank's wish to let all flow free without Government.
Government policy & oversight, including regulation and monitoring, is most definitely needed within the equation to protect.
Politics comes in when deciding how much government activity.
No government influence or total government influence are the two no no's.

Jank0614  (Level: 67.1 - Posts: 4593)
Sat, 28th Mar '09 9:29 AM

I definitely vote on the side of less government regulation of business, within the confines of the Constitution.

Plus, I just plain old see more VASTLY more corruption in government any day of the week than in business. And the government takes vastly more of my money than any business on earth.

Yet people get all upset about perceived corporate corruption which might not even affect them personally than government corruption which affects every one of us.

Pot calling the kettle black. Fox in charge of the chicken house. Bigger greedy government officials regulating smaller greedy corporate officials.

At least corporations create well-paying jobs where there is manufacturing and production of goods and services we choose to use.

The government creates many well-paying jobs that don't manufacture or produce anything, yet often interfere with our lives against our choice.

Surreyman  (Level: 272.4 - Posts: 2771)
Sat, 28th Mar '09 1:45 PM

Unfettered Big Business will never provide a safety net for the vulnerable.
So unless you are particularly hard-hearted, you have to decide how much Government control and intervention there should be, not 'if'.
And, by that measure, from the European eye, the vulnerable amongst USA citizens certainly need more, not less, protection.

Caramel1  (Level: 135.1 - Posts: 21589)
Sat, 28th Mar '09 2:02 PM

Surreyman or anyone else from that side of the pond would be interested in your views on the young guy, Daniel Hannan. Heard him on TV ad I was impressed-not sure if that was because he knows what he is talking about or because his views pretty much coincide with mine thanks in advance to anyone who chooses to respond- Linda

Bobolicios  (Level: 119.6 - Posts: 1745)
Sat, 28th Mar '09 3:35 PM

I totally emphatically agree with surreyman. It is big business that is now and has been running our government. We need more protection from them right now. Basically they run this country not government and certainly not people on either side of the political spectrum. Not even people who comment of the Salty Dog run things.

Fudypatootie  (Level: 205.9 - Posts: 1302)
Sat, 28th Mar '09 4:46 PM

All I know is, my eyes are brown, so it wasn't me....

Pages:  1    

Copyright © 2003-2017 Sploofus Holdings LLC.  All rights reserved.
Legal Notice & Privacy Statement  |  Link to Sploofus