Start the equity with teachers and professors. If their pay was less then more students could afford tuition. They would still need to earn their degrees though.

Thank you for sharing this discussion. Cheers

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
If his ass is so about "fair" 100% of his time should be free to practice his craft as others are entitled to it and receive a government stipend that is equal to the plumber's wages or the trash pick up man's wages.

He'd probably go for that. If Boston is as saturated with attorneys as Baltimore/DC Metro is, I'd guess a baby public defender is pulling in $60-70K, maybe. When I was fresh out of school, I interviewed for a couple of Assistant State's Attorney (prosecutor) jobs which paid less than I was making as a paralegal at the time.

I would have GLADLY practiced for the wages of a plumber or sanitation engineer back then.

-Rob

"If you think paying for your college was expensive, how do you think it will be when you're paying for everyone's college?"

That's when reality flees from their argument.

quote:

Originally posted by KevinCW:


I didn't have shit for life experience. What I knew was that I didn't have anything easy, and goddammit, I wanted easy. Who wouldn't?

The NUMBER ONE thing, that makes liberals into conservatives, is to have to pay for all the bullshit. Having to PAY for other fools to make foolish, dumb-ass decisions will change a man.

Bingo.

Back in 1999-2000 I helped a former co-worker at a bakery/cafe we both worked at to open her own up in the Chestnut Hill section of Philadelphia. She was an avowed liberal Democrat and we had many a good and spirited argument and debates about each side's positions etc.

One day I find her in tears and ask what was wrong. She had just gotten her tax bill and a whole lot of other bills for various "fees" and other shit that this deep blue city wanted out of her. She told me "this is enough to make me want to become a Republican."

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:

“Education should be free” huh?

Maybe ask him how teachers and professors will work for free then?

SOMEBODY is paying

It's not the government. They have no money except what they extract from "the people"

https://youtu.be/XsRk9RThGt0

On the philosophical front, that atty doesn't understand what creates value or wealth. What is more valuable, the plumber fixing a broken pipe in your home or the kid pouring your coffee? The answer explains why the customer pays more for one than the other.

Wealth is created by doing something valued by others. Wealth is not created by printing money and spreading it around. Similarly, simply assigning a person a job does not mean they add value or wealth to society.

On the practical front, that atty does not understand that the available resources to fund education (or anything) are limited to the wealth of the source. Countries with "free" university must limit how many can go. So the state selects who can go. This means either lots of standardized testing from the earliest days of schooling to determine what track each individual is assigned to, or the children of elites are given preference.

Iow, equity does not mean everybody magically has equal access. Free university does not mean everyone will be able to go.

Socialism necessarily reduces everyone's standard of living, except for the few in control.

Resources are limited because wealth of the society is finite, and because of that not everyone can be provided free college, which means there must be a selection process.

Ask your friend how that selection should be made? Ask him which surgeon he wants, or which pilot, or which tax accountant, or which plumber? The one selected via a merit based system or one selected via equity?

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
Your colleague needs a spanking. Or a punch in the mouth.

No, he is wrong.

But that doesn't mean that you punch him, even metaphorically. Talk to him, convince, even vote against his views. But don't demonize him. Looking at our fellow citizens as evil when they don't agree with us is a serious problem.

A very common saying in the old Soviet Union:

As long as the State pretends to pay me I will continue pretending to work.

I've had more than a few of these discussions with people. As best I can tell it comes down to whether you think it is wrong to take what someone has worked for and give it to someone else. I think it's immoral but some people think it's just fine as long as someone can articulate a good reason for it.

quote:

Originally posted by car541:
He is a public defender in Boston.

His entire existence is centered around people not having to pay for their own bad decisions.

What did you expect exactly?

For sure. It reminded me of this.

Recent graduate with government job acts like parasite, film at 11.

quote:

Originally posted by DaveL:
I've had more than a few of these discussions with people. As best I can tell it comes down to whether you think it is wrong to take what someone has worked for and give it to someone else. I think it's immoral but some people think it's just fine as long as someone can articulate a good reason for it.

I've had those discussions, too, and the word "fair" is what they hang their hat on. Somehow, something wasn't "fair" for some person or group, which requires tilting the table to make up for it.

The problem is, the world can never be equal for everyone. Some parents work hard, earn a good income, and thus live in a nice area with good schools and low crime. Some people have more natural talents. Some have more ambition. Some have more luck and are able to capitalize on it.

Since not everybody can or should attend college, either society wastes limited resources on sending everybody to college, or everybody must pay taxes to support only those who are selected by the state to attend.

Iow, the worker who didn't go to college must still pay for those who do go to make the system fair.

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:

quote:

Originally posted by DaveL:
I've had more than a few of these discussions with people. As best I can tell it comes down to whether you think it is wrong to take what someone has worked for and give it to someone else. I think it's immoral but some people think it's just fine as long as someone can articulate a good reason for it.

I've had those discussions, too, and the word "fair" is what they hang their hat on. Somehow, something wasn't "fair" for some person or group, which requires tilting the table to make up for it.

The problem is, the world can never be equal for everyone. Some parents work hard, earn a good income, and thus live in a nice area with good schools and low crime. Some people have more natural talents. Some have more ambition. Some have more luck and are able to capitalize on it.

Since not everybody can or should attend college, either society wastes limited resources on sending everybody to college, or everybody must pay taxes to support only those who are selected by the state to attend.

Iow, the worker who didn't go to college must still pay for those who do go to make the system fair.

That’s the buzz word. The problem with “fair” is that it’s entirely subjective. A lot of immoral and illegal things could be justified as “fair” but they’re still immoral. Like stealing from people.

One argument I’ve found effective is to ask them to consider whether they want the government to have that much power knowing that roughly every eight years someone they despise will be wielding it. Want to ban hate speech? Even if Donald Trump gets to decide what that is?

quote:

The response I received was that the system of my time failed me by instilling those ideas.

Someone's system failed someone by instilling faulty ideas....but it wasn't yours.

The conversation made me really think about the intentional divide between generations our socialized public education system is causing. I was raised by my World War II Uncles and Grandpa, there was some disagreement with some of their views, but all in all the principles, ethics and values were basically the same. Sadly my younger colleague and I couldn’t be more farther apart in views. The one positive, was there was no shutdown of the discussion with the name calling of “ists” and “isms” there was a discussion and different points of view. My greater fear is if the course isn’t corrected what is the generation 30 years behind my colleague going to be like?

I had the same discussion yesterday with a thirty something year old. Couldn't believe what I was hearing. Almost threw myself out the window.

My wife's youngest brother was a good kid, graduated HS and his conservative dentist dad sent him off to college. In this case, USM, Southern Miss. There he was indoctrinated into the ideology the OP described.

He's a museum curator or some such thing, and will gladly inform you (if you're stupid enough to give him an opening) about how society does not assign value appropriately and as such the pay scales should be adjusted to compensate for things that are just as valuable but not as lucrative. For me, as his example, he wonders why a vet should be paid more than he does, when he safeguards and displays artwork for the generations? I told him that's because people put their money (THEIR money) where they see value, and if they love their sick dog and want it well, but don't value or want to know about the Indian mounds in Louisiana, then that's their business. Told him money follows the value the buyer applies to the purchase, and that varies with everyone. So if he can live off the money the museum pays him, great. If not, choose better next time. Last time he started that crap I just told him that I would no longer play the civil discourse game, that he and his kind are destroying a country built on hard work and long hours.

As my father used to say… “No one ever shoots Santa Claus.“

quote:

Originally posted by slabsides45:
My wife's youngest brother was a good kid, graduated HS and his conservative dentist dad sent him off to college. In this case, USM, Southern Miss. There he was indoctrinated into the ideology the OP described.

He's a museum curator or some such thing, and will gladly inform you (if you're stupid enough to give him an opening) about how society does not assign value appropriately and as such the pay scales should be adjusted to compensate for things that are just as valuable but not as lucrative. For me, as his example, he wonders why a vet should be paid more than he does, when he safeguards and displays artwork for the generations? I told him that's because people put their money (THEIR money) where they see value, and if they love their sick dog and want it well, but don't value or want to know about the Indian mounds in Louisiana, then that's their business. Told him money follows the value the buyer applies to the purchase, and that varies with everyone. So if he can live off the money the museum pays him, great. If not, choose better next time. Last time he started that crap I just told him that I would no longer play the civil discourse game, that he and his kind are destroying a country built on hard work and long hours.

None of them understand microeconomics and the way the market sets prices. My niece (who I love dearly) is a teacher, and complains about her pay. I think, but don't say: If you got a degree in and entered a field that wasn't one that attracts a lot of applicants, you would earn a higher salary. But there is a relatively large supply of teachers as compared to, say, chemical engineers. So the price for chemical engineers is higher.