Fairness -- talking about taking the idea of taxing for fairness to its limits of absurdity:
Thus, the absurd becomes the new reasonable. (How else could Obama have been elected?) Many people seem to think "fairness" should be defined as what's needed in order to allocate equal sameness. The idea is that a just God, Gov, or Big Bro should not tolerate any unequal advantage, perspective, or accident of birth in anyone. What you want less of, you tax. Therefore, tax out of existence all differentiating initiative. Indeed, in fairness, why should any human perspective be tolerated to have so much more at its immediate command than the meekest mouse? Give mice the vote and then there will be fairness! After all, there is no real "merit." You didn't birth capacity for earning to yourself. Nor did you by yourself birth IQ (or sociopathic covetousness). Indeed, tax away the originating crack in symmetry! (Problem is, were IQ taxed, smart people would then deliberately handicap their performances on IQ tests, and would lay snares that caused sheeple to score higher. Welcome to FairWorld.)
.
Thus, singular subjective standards (like fairness, equality, justice, morality) seem often to twist into absurdity. WWJD has a nice ring, but leads easily to absurd applications. Maybe it would make more fulfilling sense to think about how each perspective should be facilitated to pursue or end on its own fulfillment, without coveting the material gains of others. Maybe tax policy should be focused on establishing and sustaining infrastructure for a decent society of free thinkers, rather than on pretending to entitle people who are less materially successful to equally "fair" quantities of stuff for soothing their feelings.
Thus, the absurd becomes the new reasonable. (How else could Obama have been elected?) Many people seem to think "fairness" should be defined as what's needed in order to allocate equal sameness. The idea is that a just God, Gov, or Big Bro should not tolerate any unequal advantage, perspective, or accident of birth in anyone. What you want less of, you tax. Therefore, tax out of existence all differentiating initiative. Indeed, in fairness, why should any human perspective be tolerated to have so much more at its immediate command than the meekest mouse? Give mice the vote and then there will be fairness! After all, there is no real "merit." You didn't birth capacity for earning to yourself. Nor did you by yourself birth IQ (or sociopathic covetousness). Indeed, tax away the originating crack in symmetry! (Problem is, were IQ taxed, smart people would then deliberately handicap their performances on IQ tests, and would lay snares that caused sheeple to score higher. Welcome to FairWorld.)
.
Thus, singular subjective standards (like fairness, equality, justice, morality) seem often to twist into absurdity. WWJD has a nice ring, but leads easily to absurd applications. Maybe it would make more fulfilling sense to think about how each perspective should be facilitated to pursue or end on its own fulfillment, without coveting the material gains of others. Maybe tax policy should be focused on establishing and sustaining infrastructure for a decent society of free thinkers, rather than on pretending to entitle people who are less materially successful to equally "fair" quantities of stuff for soothing their feelings.
2 comments:
On the unfair oppression of the new "fair-minded" majority (taxing for fairness to its limits of absurdity): Many people seem to think "fairness" should be defined as what's needed in order to allocate equal sameness. The idea is that a just God, Gov, or Big Bro should not tolerate any unequal advantage, perspective, or accident of birth in anyone. What you want less of, you tax. Therefore, tax out of existence all differentiating initiative. Indeed, in fairness, why should any human perspective be tolerated to have so much more at its immediate command than the meekest mouse? Give mice the vote and then there will be fairness! After all, there is no real "merit." You didn't birth capacity for earning to yourself. Nor did you by yourself birth IQ (or sociopathic covetousness). Indeed, tax away the originating crack in symmetry! (Problem is, were IQ taxed, smart people would then deliberately handicap their performances on IQ tests, and would lay snares that caused sheeple to score higher. Welcome to FairWorld.)
.
Thus, singular subjective standards (like fairness, equality, justice, morality) are often twisted to absurdity. WWJD has a nice ring, but easily leads many to absurd applications. Maybe it would make more fulfilling sense to think about how each perspective should be facilitated to pursue (or end on) its own fulfillment, without coveting the material gains of others. Maybe tax policy should be focused on establishing and sustaining borders and infrastructure for a decent society of free thinkers, rather than on pretending to entitle people who are less materially successful to equally "fair" quantities of stuff for soothing their feelings. Maybe a decent system of education would have inculcated such an idea. Now, that may have to wait a thousand years. I would "thank" Obama, but that would give him too much credit. Obama was just primed to open the door on a house of horrors that Corruptocrats and Ignorarats had worked 50 years to build.
I have no desire to support ANY party that panders based on ethnicity, ignorance, and feelings of covetousness. I want a party and country that supports decent freedom of expression and enterprise, i.e., a thinking party. I want NO PART OF fairness being defined as redistribution for the sake of assauging feelings of covetousness. I want fairness being defined as what it takes to sustain decent opportunity for each citizen to pursue his/her own fulfillment. That means redistribution for the purpose of preserving borders, values, and physical and political infrastructure --- not for soothing able bodied individuals bent on acting entitled, and not for incenting them to avoid "acting white." I would rather watch gangsters destroy themselves than enlist to help them destroy common decency.
Post a Comment