Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
I think he's right that some people are just too dim to get on in life. We have less and less decent jobs available for people of lower than average intelligence, largely because we can automate a lot of what they used to do and partly because much of the really backbreaking work in industry is now done in other parts of the world. He does actually say that those people will need to be helped, but doesn´t give much information as to how they will be helped and I think tat´s going to be a bigger and bigger issue.
And what exactly is wrong with an "ad hominem" argument? Dodgy Agent, 16-5-2014
I think he's right that some people are just too dim to get on in life. We have less and less decent jobs available for people of lower than average intelligence, largely because we can automate a lot of what they used to do and partly because much of the really backbreaking work in industry is now done in other parts of the world. He does actually say that those people will need to be helped, but doesn´t give much information as to how they will be helped and I think tat´s going to be a bigger and bigger issue.
I think the go suity thread show how peer support can get these people through.
I think he's right that some people are just too dim to get on in life. We have less and less decent jobs available for people of lower than average intelligence, largely because we can automate a lot of what they used to do and partly because much of the really backbreaking work in industry is now done in other parts of the world. He does actually say that those people will need to be helped, but doesn´t give much information as to how they will be helped and I think tat´s going to be a bigger and bigger issue.
Perhaps we just have to accept that lots of people will be on benefits. Or we give them jobs in Councils and other places that no one expects to work properly.
While you're waiting, read the free novel we sent you. It's a Spanish story about a guy named 'Manual.'
Every time I read something like this I wonder how we have become obsessed with 'equality' - it is logically impossible for everyone to be equal to everyone else but the powers that be seem to be determined to socially engineer to a point where everyone has been reduced to the lowest common denominator.
Originally posted by LisaContractorUmbrellaView Post
Every time I read something like this I wonder how we have become obsessed with 'equality' - it is logically impossible for everyone to be equal to everyone else but the powers that be seem to be determined to socially engineer to a point where everyone has been reduced to the lowest common denominator.
It is entirely logically possible for everyone to be equal to each other in terms of their worth as human beings. You may or may not agree that this is in fact the case.
If you mean that it is not logically possible for everyone to have an equal economic outcome, you are right. But nobody on the left has been aiming for that since utopian socialism went out of fashion in about 1830. KEEP UP!
It is entirely logically possible for everyone to be equal to each other in terms of their worth as human beings. You may or may not agree that this is in fact the case.
If you mean that it is not logically possible for everyone to have an equal economic outcome, you are right. But nobody on the left has been aiming for that since utopian socialism went out of fashion in about 1830. KEEP UP!
First point - it depends on your definition of 'worth'
Second point - perhaps you would be kind enough then to explain what on earth they are up to
Originally posted by LisaContractorUmbrellaView Post
First point - it depends on your definition of 'worth'
Second point - perhaps you would be kind enough then to explain what on earth they are up to
First point - of course it does, but there are definitions within which equality is logically possible.
Second point - most people on the left are looking to reduce inequalities in economic outcome, and reform or replace the structures that lead to increased inequality.
Of course you will disagree with this and that is fine. I merely wanted to point out how ridiculous your previous statement was.
It is entirely logically possible for everyone to be equal to each other in terms of their worth as human beings. You may or may not agree that this is in fact the case.
If you mean that it is not logically possible for everyone to have an equal economic outcome, you are right. But nobody on the left has been aiming for that since utopian socialism went out of fashion in about 1830. KEEP UP!
Comment