[acadian]

Linky

Personally, I think the term "fair" is bandied about far too flippantly these days.

[Y3a]

NO! NOT A THING. Government doesn't either. Earning must not be in very many peoples vocabulary anymore.

[philm]

Here's what The Smiths have to say on the matter:

I decree today that life
Is simply taking and not giving
England is mine and it owes me a living
But ask me why, and I’ll spit in your eye, no
Oh, ask me why, and I’ll spit in your eye
Look, we cannot cling to the old dreams anymore
No, we cannot cling to those dreams

[Monique]

No we owe each other respect, kindness and if someone is once in a while in need; you don't kick him or her; bring in soup or a blanket.

[rickey939]

The opposite of "Hell yes" is my answer.

[teney7]

Yes. it owes me an iMac G5 with iSight. Right now.

[rickey939]

Originally Posted by teney7

Yes. it owes me an iMac G5 with iSight. Right now.

I'd be happy with a free download of Photo Booth for existing iSight owners personally...

[cjrivera]

Originally Posted by rickey939

The opposite of "Hell yes" is my answer.

Heavens no

[TETENAL]

Does the World Owe You a Living? And Should It?
Does a citizen have the right to expect that certain basics be provided to him, such as health care, housing – and a job?

"The world" is far too abstract to answer this question in a meaningful way.
Humanity (or christianity?) makes us take care of those who are not able to do so for themselves. Not because we do owe it to them, but because we believe it's the right thing to do.

I don't get the rest of the article. If you think outsourcing sucks, don't vote for a party that gives tax benefits for companies who do it.

[sminch]

damn those smiths.

i was looking for a job and then i found a job
and heaven knows i'm miserable now

sminch

[Mastrap]

Can't stand The Smiths. Miserable bastards, the lot of them.

[Cubeoid]

opiates will destter you so please let glllllllll;llllll;;''///llllopplll;;;''//.,,mmnn

[Goldfinger]

Originally Posted by cjrivera

Heavens no

You stole my joke.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by philm

Here's what The Smiths have to say on the matter:

I decree today that life
Is simply taking and not giving
England is mine and it owes me a living
But ask me why, and I’ll spit in your eye, no
Oh, ask me why, and I’ll spit in your eye
Look, we cannot cling to the old dreams anymore
No, we cannot cling to those dreams

Excellent song.

Yes, every govt./society that expects you to abide by it's rules owes you a living. It's the price for you giving up your "natural being".

The Social Contract (Rousseau)

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Warung

Yes, every govt./society that expects you to abide by it's rules owes you a living. It's the price for you giving up your "natural being".

You aren't forced to live there. So no, no one OWES you anything. But they can in the kindness of their heart, help you.

[dcmacdaddy]

The "world", or any government for that matter, doesn't OWE you a living.

All it owes you is the chance to try and make a living for yourself within a
sound legal framework that doesn't provides certain individuals or groups
a preferential advantage.

Whether you take this chance to make a living for yourself is up to you.
And whether you succeed or fail if you take this chance is up to you. The
"world" shouldn't guarantee success, just the chance to try to succeed.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

The "world", or any government for that matter, doesn't OWE you a living.

All it owes you is the chance to try and make a living for yourself within a
sound legal framework that doesn't provides certain individuals or groups
a preferential advantage.

Whether you take this chance to make a living for yourself is up to you.
And whether you succeed or fail if you take this chance is up to you. The
"world" shouldn't guarantee success, just the chance to try to succeed.

Spot-On.

[MacPoker101]

The world does not owe us anything. it did give us life.
We owe it some respect, lets not abuse,spoil or pollute it.

[wdlove]

No, the world owes us nothing. We each are to get a good education and work hard.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by Kevin

You aren't forced to live there. So no, no one OWES you anything. But they can in the kindness of their heart, help you.

It doesn't matter where you live, as long as a body of govt. or society forces you to abide by their rules and give up your "natural rights", they owe you.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Warung

It doesn't matter where you live, as long as a body of govt. or society forces you to abide by their rules and give up your "natural rights", they owe you.

What "natural rights" is that? And who gives us these rights?

And say that all you want, it's not true. No one OWES us anything. We EARN something. That is indeed the way it works.

Now, you can say you THINK that because you FEEL you are being forced to go along against your "natural rights" that someone owes you something. And that is ok.

But that simply isn't factual.

[Eriamjh]

I say FLOCK no. .

[Krusty]

The way this question is cast, from a moral perspective vs. a practical one, informs the answer everyone seems to be giving. Of course, from a moral perspective, the "world" (i.e. government I suppose in this context) doesn't have an obligation to provide employment to its citizens.

But from a practical perspective it should. The power behind any mode of governance comes from its ability to engage its citizenry in activities that are productive for that mode of governance (i.e. that society). In feudal times that meant the nobility taking a portion of excess crops and livestock from serfs. Today with people engaged in a much wider variety of activities than farming, that means abstracting the value of those activities into money and collecting it as taxes from the citizenry which supports the power of the government by paying for an Army, police, and other infrastructure such as communications, mass transit, publicly funded technological research etc. ... all of which makes the society in its current form "work". Put simply, a person with no job who pays no taxes does not enhance the power of the governing body or society at all ... just as a serf who grew no food was of no use to the landlord. Similarly, the more money individuals make, the more they typically contribute through taxes (unless they have a really good accountant ) so it is not only in the government's interest to encourage job growth, but to encourage higher paying jobs as well.

So does the "world" owe somebody a job? No. Is it a really really really good idea for the "world" to encourage jobs and higher wages. Yes. Jobs, taxes, and civil societies ARE NOT moral institutions ... they are practical ones, created by people. Applying moral judgments to them is entirely the wrong approach, IMHO. If a large number of people cannot find a job commensurate with their education, that's a practical problem for a nation that won't be solved by pretending that if a person just tries harder, a job will magically appear for them. I'm not saying a government should just make jobs up for these people but they should be actively engaged in the "big picture" of employment and doing whatever it can to maintain a well-employed populace for its own sake.

[spindler]

The premise of this is that average people who would like higher salaries at the expense of megamillionaires are cheating someone else.

I don't need "the world" to give regular people anything. All I want is for regular people to get their fair share. When 2000 auto workers work hard all day long and then Lee Iacocca gets an $80m salary equal to all of their's put together this is supposedly "fair". Then the auto workers are "stealing" from him if they think it is wrong that he got such a big piece of the pie.

The world doesn't have to give the workers at Walmart anything. If these workers just got to take part in the profits equal to the amount of work they do for the company and the neighborhood their salaries would be a good deal higher. Instead the investor class gets the profits.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Now, you can say you THINK that because you FEEL you are being forced to go along against your "natural rights" that someone owes you something. And that is ok.

But that simply isn't factual.

Well, call it whatever you want, but the "default mode of life" is that you have neither neither rights nor obligations. All living things simply strive to survive and pass on their genes.

Once you are a part of a society, you have certain obligations (those are simply conventions to facility life in a situation where a lot of people have to life together in order to make a "community" work), and at the same time this society has to grant you certain rights, and basically "owes" (this actually isn't a very good term to describe "what is going on") you the means of "survival" (which is what I personally mean here by living).

What I "think" and "feel" here is completely irrelevant to the argument.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by Krusty

If a large number of people cannot find a job commensurate with their education, that's a practical problem for a nation that won't be solved by pretending that if a person just tries harder, a job will magically appear for them. I'm not saying a government should just make jobs up for these people but they should be actively engaged in the "big picture" of employment and doing whatever it can to maintain a well-employed populace for its own sake.

Excellent.

[King Bob On The Cob]

Can't tax the un-employed, so the government would LOVE for you to have a job.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Warung

Well, call it whatever you want, but the "default mode of life" is that you have neither neither rights nor obligations. All living things simply strive to survive and pass on their genes.

According to? I mean you are more than welcome to feel that way. But please don't act as it's some sort of unquestioned truth.

Once you are a part of a society, you have certain obligations (those are simply conventions to facility life in a situation where a lot of people have to life together in order to make a "community" work), and at the same time this society has to grant you certain rights, and basically "owes" (this actually isn't a very good term to describe "what is going on") you the means of "survival" (which is what I personally mean here by living).

What I "think" and "feel" here is completely irrelevant to the argument.

Well obviously it isn't. Because no one OWES you a living in REAL LIFE. So this IS how you feel. And NOT how things are.

So it HAS to be how you THINK things SHOULD be.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by Kevin

According to? I mean you are more than welcome to feel that way. But please don't act as it's some sort of unquestioned truth.

Errrm, if there is no state or society to interact with, where do you think any laws would come from that you have an obligation to?

Originally Posted by Kevin

Well obviously it isn't. Because no one OWES you a living in REAL LIFE.

Right, that's what I said. Just like you don't owe anything to anybody in "REAL LIFE" (whatever that means). As soon as society is involved, it becomes a "give and take" proposition.

Originally Posted by Kevin

So it HAS to be how you THINK things SHOULD be.

To a certain extent this is true for every argument. But again, it doesn't have anything to do with how I "feel". It's more about a philosophical consequence if anything else.

[Big Mac]

The only thing the world owes me is to not interfere with my rights.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

The only thing the world owes me is to not interfere with my rights.

What "world" and what "rights"?

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Well obviously it isn't. Because no one OWES you a living in REAL LIFE. So this IS how you feel. And NOT how things are.

You could have just written "I am rubber and you are glue." It would have been shorter.

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Warung

It doesn't matter where you live, as long as a body of govt. or society forces you to abide by their rules and give up your "natural rights", they owe you.

This argument is fallacious simply because in the absence of a government or "civilized" society we have no "natural rights". Zero.

I'm sorry to tell you but without the structure of civilization there is only nature and nature really doesn't care about you. Human or mouse or insect. Thrive or strive, live or die. Nature doesn't care.

[Big Mac]

We always have natural rights. Whether or not they're respected by others or society is a different story.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by smacintush

This argument is fallacious simply because in the absence of a government or "civilized" society we have no "natural rights". Zero.

I'm sorry to tell you but without the structure of civilization there is only nature and nature really doesn't care about you. Human or mouse or insect. Thrive or strive, live or die. Nature doesn't care.

You're correct. "Natural rights" really is a misnomer.

But you're essentially just re-stating my argument. A system of rights and "obligations" comes into the picture only when one enters into a social "framework" (unless of course, you consider "laws of nature", or evolution actual laws).

The true fallacy is to think that there is any objective justification for any "body" of govt. or society to "grant" rights. What actually happens, is that the individual "forefits" his or her law-free "state of nature" (as brutish and short as it might be ;-)) in order to become a member of a "functioning" society.

Yes, "nature doesn't care" (actually this is wrong, because there are some damn good theories and philosophies that describe the "framework" of nature).

[Warung]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

We always have natural rights.

Interesting. What would you consider a "natural right"?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Warung

Errrm, if there is no state or society to interact with, where do you think any laws would come from that you have an obligation to?

Exactly my point Warung. You are making up "Default rules of life" that simply do not exist. So if no "rule" existed, there would be no "Default rules of life"

Irrelevant however.

Right, that's what I said. Just like you don't owe anything to anybody in "REAL LIFE" (whatever that means). As soon as society is involved, it becomes a "give and take" proposition.

No, no it does not. It becomes a "You are part of society, you do something with yourself, or you do not" No one hands you anything.

NOW, you can CHOOSE to join a socialist program if you decide not to be part of society that pays you little money for doing EXACTLY what they tell you to do.

But that isn't the norm.

To a certain extent this is true for every argument. But again, it doesn't have anything to do with how I "feel". It's more about a philosophical consequence if anything else.

And I am speaking about HOW THINGS ARE RIGHT NOW.

AT THIS MOMENT. NO ONE OWES YOU A LIVING.

Originally Posted by smacintush

This argument is fallacious simply because in the absence of a government or "civilized" society we have no "natural rights". Zero.

I'm sorry to tell you but without the structure of civilization there is only nature and nature really doesn't care about you. Human or mouse or insect. Thrive or strive, live or die. Nature doesn't care.

Indeed.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

You could have just written "I am rubber and you are glue." It would have been shorter.

Actually Warung replied to me in such a way, so I threw it back at him.

He is totally ignoring the part about how his ideals how things work have very little to do with how they REALLY work. And even when you point that out, he totally ignores it and repeats the same thing.

So yeah.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by Kevin

You are making up "Default rules of life" that simply do not exist.

No, Kevin. I'm not "making up" anything. Life itself doesn't impose any rules on you which are relevant to existing in a society (or this argument). If you know of any, please feel free to share them.

Originally Posted by Kevin

No one hands you anything.

What does "handing you anything" have to do with this argument? I am saying that in principle and philosophically "govt." owes you what you need to survive.

Originally Posted by Kevin

But that isn't the norm.

What the hell are you on about? There is no universal "govermental" or "societal" structure and "norm".

Originally Posted by Kevin

AT THIS MOMENT. NO ONE OWES YOU A LIVING.

Time also is of no essence. Again, any society that requires from you the giving up of your "natural state" (call it "rights" or whatever) "owes“ you the means of survival.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Warung

No, Kevin. I'm not "making up" anything. Life itself doesn't impose any rules on you which are relevant to existing in a society (or this argument). If you know of any, please feel free to share them.

I think the way you act or treat another person or morals one lives by has always been around yes. You do not believe that. That is fine. Neither of us REALLY KNOW

This is what I am saying.

What does "handing you anything" have to do with this argument? I am saying that in principle and philosophically "govt." owes you what you need to survive.

No, that is your view of it. And in reality, it does not work that way.

What the hell are you on about?

Well I explained what I was going on about in the parts you clipped out of my quote.

There is no universal "govermental" or "societal" structure and "norm".

Actually there IS a norm. And that norm isn't gov providing jobs for people that do what they tell them. That is more along the terms of Socialism. And Socialism is not the norm.

Time also is of no essence.

Uh, but we are talking about the present. So it's relevent.

Again, any society that requires from you the giving up of your "natural state" (call it "rights" or whatever) "owes“ you the means of survival.

AND AGAIN, you can GO ON BELIEVING THAT, but it has no BEARING with what is THE NORM in this planet we call EARTH.

Society doesn't GIVE you jobs. You EARN them. Not because you follow along with society, but because you have trained yourself, or are willing to train yourself to do said job, and you are the one they choose.

Unless you live in a socialized state.

NOW, if you want to say "Well in socialized states" then you get no arguements from me.

You do what the gov tells you, and they give you a job like it or not, and you shut up.

I'd rather work for my goals.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I think the way you act or treat another person or morals one lives by has always been around yes.

What? You are saying this hasn't changed throughout history? You can't be serious? Do you have any formal education at all?

Originally Posted by Kevin

Actually there IS a norm.

Huh??? Wha..... Do you even know what the word "norm" means? Here is a hint, - it doesn't mean "average", or "most often used". There are a large variety of forms of govt. - Republics, Socialist States, Fascist Regimes, Oligarchys, Social Democracies, Kingdoms etc.

Which one is the norm?

Or are you trying to say, - most governments in the world today don't offer their citizens the basic means of survival? If so, this is not what I'm arguing.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Uh, but we are talking about the present.

No, we're not. We're talking about wether IN PRINCIPLE govts. and societies OWE their citizens the basic means of survival.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Society doesn't GIVE you jobs.

I'm not talking about jobs, I'm talking about the basic means of "survival" (security, medical care, food, a roof over the head...)

Originally Posted by Kevin

You EARN them. Not because you follow along with society, but because you have trained yourself, or are willing to train yourself to do said job, and you are the one they choose.

LOL. Idealist?

Originally Posted by Kevin

You do what the gov tells you, and they give you a job like it or not, and you shut up.

What??? Bwahhahahaaa! What country are you talking about?

Originally Posted by Kevin

I'd rather work for my goals.

I'd rather do what I damn well please (which, incidentally is exactly what I'm doing right now). But, even at that, it's completely irrelevant to this argument.

[Railroader]

My opinion: (But first, before Warung can get into a semantics argument with me, "World"=society where you live, "Owe"=should give, and "Living"=a job.) No.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Warung

What? You are saying this hasn't changed throughout history? You can't be serious? Do you have any formal education at all?

I see you are still taking what I say, spinning it into some bizarro extreme version of what I said, then trying to argue that. Poorly I might add.

Huh??? Wha..... Do you even know what the word "norm" means? Here is a hint, - it doesn't mean "average", or "most often used". There are a large variety of forms of govt. - Republics, Socialist States, Fascist Regimes, Oligarchys, Social Democracies, Kingdoms etc.

Which one is the norm?

Ah the silly semantics argument brought up when the original argument isn't working.

Or are you trying to say, - most governments in the world today don't offer their citizens the basic means of survival? If so, this is not what I'm arguing.

Then you aren't arguing what we are arguing, and you are spinning it mid-arguement. The question is if the Gov OWES YOU A LIVING. Meaning. Is it the Gov job to make sure you are employed.

No, we're not. We're talking about wether IN PRINCIPLE govts. and societies OWE their citizens the basic means of survival.

Warung pay attention. We are talking about if the Gov owes people a living. Stop with the silly semantics argument and spinning.

I'm not talking about jobs, I'm talking about the basic means of "survival" (security, medical care, food, a roof over the head...)

In other words, Owed a living. You are again trying to argue semantics.

I'd rather do what I damn well please (which, incidentally is exactly what I'm doing right now). But, even at that, it's completely irrelevant to this argument.

Most of your posts are irrelevant to this argument. So I don't see why that should stop you.

You've been arguing what you THINK the gov owes people. Not if they actually do or not.

Heck even the most socialized countries rarely OWE anyone a living.

AGAIN

Society doesn't GIVE you jobs. You EARN them. Not because you follow along with society, but because you have trained yourself, or are willing to train yourself to do said job, and you are the one said company chooses to do said job because you are qualified.

I wouldn't want a job any other way.

I guess some people are used to getting things just handed to them. And they expect it.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Railroader

My opinion: (But first, before Warung can get into a semantics argument with me,

He only does that when his "rant" isn't following through like he thought it would. But I am glad I am not the only one that noticed his little semantics rant.

"World"=society where you live, "Owe"=should give, and "Living"=a job.) No.

Exactly. The world owes no one a living. The people out there that think ANYONE owes them anything just for existing is out for a BIG SURPRISE.

[Weyland-Yutani]

No the World does not owe you a living. When push comes to shove you are truly alone and will have to fend for yourself any way you can. As it has always been.

However in many societies, the society has decided that everyone pays a tax to society and in return the society will protect and preserve the rights of its individuals. There the society owes the individual a living because the individual pays to society.

It's like a club. If you don't like it you can always find another.

cheers

W-Y

[Kevin]

Actually paying taxes is a form of protection. Much like the mob.

"You pay taxes, we wont let so and so come over and take your land."

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Actually paying taxes is a form of protection.

Absoloutly. It has been the trend for centuries if not millennia. Kings collected taxed to protect their citizens from attacks, crime and such things. Modern taxes also go to protection in that way but also social protection. Such is the way of things. Of course like the Mafia, you either pay or be punished.

(although I'd say one gets more back from paying one's taxes to society than paying the mafia protection money!)

cheers

W-Y

[Warung]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I see you are still taking what I say, spinning it into some bizarro extreme version of what I said, then trying to argue that.

Then could you stop being so deliberately vague and fu<king spineless, and just say what you think. *duh*

In light of the argument, WTF is this supposed to mean:

I think the way you act or treat another person or morals one lives by has always been around yes. You do not believe that. That is fine. Neither of us REALLY KNOW

?????

Originally Posted by Kevin

Meaning. Is it the Gov job to make sure you are employed.

Nevermind then. I wasn't talking about employment. In my book "a living" != employment. But whatever.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Not because you follow along with society, but because you have trained yourself, or are willing to train yourself to do said job, and you are the one said company chooses to do said job because you are qualified.

But isn't that exactly what this article is about? People training themselves, willing to do a job, and then not getting an opportunity at employment???

The problem is, that a lot of people think "education" (especially secondary education) is a guarantee for a job (which it isn't). This isn't the fault of individuals who choose to educate themselves, but the "fault" (problem of) politics not making the economy follow in suit with institutions of higher education. It's even worse. It's exactly the other way around. That's why you have the most spineless, uneducated and emotionally retarded people in positions of power when it comes to employment.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

Kings collected taxed to protect their citizens from attacks, crime and such things. Modern taxes also go to protection in that way but also social protection...

And this wouldn't happen to have anything to do with certain advancements in terms of philosophy?

Of course people like Kevin don't know the first fu<king thing about philosphy and only enduldge in their completely retarded, backwards Protestant work ethic, and authoritarian tripe. But what the hell (excuse the pun) do you expect from people who believe in a literal existence of the afterlife?!

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Warung

Then could stop being so deliberately vague and fu<king spineless, and just say what you think. *duh*

Um Warung, don't blame me for you taking what I said, turning into some bizarro version of what I said into me being vague or "spineless" (How silly)

You just took it and turned it into something you could argue about. JUST LIKE YOU ARE DOING NOW.

In light of the argument, WTF is this supposed to mean:

I think the way you act, or treat another person or morals one lives by has always been around. I am saying that I believe we didn't ever have free will to do what we wanted without consequences. You think otherwise. I have no problem with you thinking otherwise, other than the fact, you are using this thought, as a fact to base your arguement on.

?????

If you simply did not understand what I said, say so. Exaggerating what I said into something OTHER than what I said isn't something I made you do.

Nevermind then. I wasn't talking about employment. In my book "a living" != employment. But whatever.

Tell us, how does one make a living, without working?

But isn't that exactly what this article is about? People training themselves, willing to do a job, and then not getting an opportunity at employment???

You must have glanced over the part in my quote where I said "And said company chooses you" part. No company or gov owes you a job. That is up to you.

The problem is, that a lot of people think "education" (especially secondary education) is a guarantee for a job (which it isn't).

Actually most people I know believe college is just something that is NEEDED to get a decent job. I don't know anyone that thinks just because they have a degree they automatically have a job.

This isn't the fault of individuals who choose to educate themselves, but the "fault" (problem of) politics not making the economy follow in suit with institutions of higher education. It's even worse. It's exactly the other way around.

The people make up the economy. The people's actions are what chooses what to buy, and when to buy it. Supply and Demand. I really WISH the Gov had a nice little economy button.

The gov's job is to protect, and to make sure we have the ability to create a job market.
The creating is up to us.

Sure the Gov helps out from time to time. But they are in no position to OWE anyone a living.