Liberals - Is it ok to redistribute your GPA

EmBleve

markin ball wrote:

I understand your point. It violates your personal freedoms to be forced to pay into a system that you don't agree with, at least in part. There is no such thing as 100% personal freedom in any society, though. We always trade some personal freedoms when we live together and seek to do things for the common good. Complete personal liberty ends as soon as the first law is made. So you want to draw the line in one place and others want to draw it in another. There will surely be abusers in every system but the best we can do is not be the parents you described above and instead promote compassion and understanding as well as personal responsibility.

great post.

gimmesometruth27

and for the record, high school gpa is not the only thing that determines your ability to get into a college.

act, or sat, standardized testing anyone???

haffajappa

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

and for the record, high school gpa is not the only thing that determines your ability to get into a college.

act, or sat, standardized testing anyone???

or a daddy with a big wallet...

gimmesometruth27

haffajappa wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

and for the record, high school gpa is not the only thing that determines your ability to get into a college.

act, or sat, standardized testing anyone???

or a daddy with a big wallet...

yeah but my dad could not afford to donate a new building or anything...

i just finished paying back my loans in 2010...

should we redistribute our ACT scores?

how about give people bigger loans so they can go to the school of their choice?

Blockhead

haffajappa wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

and for the record, high school gpa is not the only thing that determines your ability to get into a college.

act, or sat, standardized testing anyone???

or a daddy with a big wallet...

How is inheritance of wealth any less noble than inheritance of genetics? Why don't you go hate on the guy who got good genes while your at it as well. All they did was be born and they got all those good genes!
As far as it goes, the free market gives people the best chance to succeed monetarily than any other system. If people had all their money redistributed, what incentive would there be to create more wealth?

Blockhead

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

haffajappa wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

and for the record, high school gpa is not the only thing that determines your ability to get into a college.

act, or sat, standardized testing anyone???

or a daddy with a big wallet...

yeah but my dad could not afford to donate a new building or anything...

i just finished paying back my loans in 2010...

should we redistribute our ACT scores?

how about give people bigger loans so they can go to the school of their choice?

If your not for GPA/ ACT / SAT being distributed then how can you be for money people work for? How is that logical. Money/GPA/ACT, ect all help people better their lives and achieve success. SO why only go after the money?

gimmesometruth27

Blockhead wrote:

If your not for GPA/ ACT / SAT being distributed then how can you be for money people work for? How is that logical. Money/GPA/ACT, ect all help people better their lives and achieve success. SO why only go after the money?

why must i be for one and if i am not for one then i am automatically for the other?

i am not against giving money because that is part of the society that you live in. if you don't want to pay for other people then don't pay your taxes, and see if you end up in prison. that is what society has agreed on. we take care of other people here. some like me don't mind it, and a few who think like you piss and moan and carry on and on about something that they can't change. i would like to see you as a 70 year old man and need to have an operation that requires medicare reimbursement like a hip replacement. i would be willing to bet that you would gladly accept that rather than pay for it out of pocket. because, i mean, why should you have to pay for it when others will, right?

i have tired of the worn out $ and gpa analogy. you have your opinion, i have mine.

mikepegg44

Blockhead wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

haffajappa wrote:

or a daddy with a big wallet...

yeah but my dad could not afford to donate a new building or anything...

i just finished paying back my loans in 2010...

should we redistribute our ACT scores?

how about give people bigger loans so they can go to the school of their choice?

If your not for GPA/ ACT / SAT being distributed then how can you be for money people work for? How is that logical. Money/GPA/ACT, ect all help people better their lives and achieve success. SO why only go after the money?

I don't particularly care for the analogy, but how about looking at it a little differently...what you call income redistribution is a progressive tax system...I understand the frustration with it, personally I would rather see a loop hole/subsidy-less system that is a simple flat tax, but either way those tax dollars pay for programs that are trying (misguided or not isn't the question here) to make the united states a better place to live for everyone. They aren't meant specifically to give income from one person to another simply to do it...while that is what you may perceive is happening, I can tell you from experience that isn't looking at the whole story. if you disagree with how a program is implemented what is your solution? personally I think that a revamp of the welfare system is in order with more focus on job training.

Blockhead

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

If your not for GPA/ ACT / SAT being distributed then how can you be for money people work for? How is that logical. Money/GPA/ACT, ect all help people better their lives and achieve success. SO why only go after the money?

why must i be for one and if i am not for one then i am automatically for the other?

i am not against giving money because that is part of the society that you live in. if you don't want to pay for other people then don't pay your taxes, and see if you end up in prison. that is what society has agreed on. we take care of other people here. some like me don't mind it, and a few who think like you piss and moan and carry on and on about something that they can't change. i would like to see you as a 70 year old man and need to have an operation that requires medicare reimbursement like a hip replacement. i would be willing to bet that you would gladly accept that rather than pay for it out of pocket. because, i mean, why should you have to pay for it when others will, right?

i have tired of the worn out $ and gpa analogy. you have your opinion, i have mine.

Because the reasons you give me for not wanting your GPA / ACT/ whatever redistributed is the same reason I give you for not wanting my Pay check redistributed, but for some reason its a problem (selfish, don't care about the poor) for me to have that stance. I am just pointing out your and everyone on this boards hypocrisy.

stuckinline

Blockhead wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

I am just pointing out your and everyone on this boards hypocrisy.

Everyone's hypocrisy?

JonnyPistachio

stuckinline wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

I am just pointing out your and everyone on this boards hypocrisy.

Everyone's hypocrisy?

Its not hypocrisy, Blockhead, just because you came up with an analogy (a rather far fetched one).

pjfan021

i think the term "wealth redistribution" is kinda a bullshit term. It's taxes..the tax code. I think your analogy is terrible (not you questioning the president's actions) and I will plain and simply answer it no.

Blockhead, did you have such a distaste for the tax brackets under Clinton? More importantly, do you believe that corp. should get the tax breaks they're getting?

I see more rational for giving people a tax break when they financially need it...makes little sense to be giving billion dollar corp. a large amount of money off their tax books when they have billions already. They bring in money to states and local communities, but they do not need billions in dollars a year that goes into the pockets of ceo's who in turn fuck up the economy and or enviorment in the process.

_

Blockhead wrote:

gaining and obtaining welth isn't a personal acheivement?

No, it's not. Not to the extent you think it is, anyway.

haffajappa

Blockhead wrote:

haffajappa wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

and for the record, high school gpa is not the only thing that determines your ability to get into a college.

act, or sat, standardized testing anyone???

or a daddy with a big wallet...

How is inheritance of wealth any less noble than inheritance of genetics? Why don't you go hate on the guy who got good genes while your at it as well. All they did was be born and they got all those good genes!
As far as it goes, the free market gives people the best chance to succeed monetarily than any other system. If people had all their money redistributed, what incentive would there be to create more wealth?

Umm... what? I'm just adding that its another way of getting into college... just stating a fact. Is it not one of the ways?

I'm not hating.
Although, its not like I respect any of the rich kids who goof off and cause distractions in my lectures because their daddies in Shanghai bought them an Audi and wire them 10k each month for allowance.


edit: and i'm not sure where I said "inheritance of wealth"..

usamamasan1

polaris_x wrote:

how about this - you are stranded in a remote area with no chance of rescue for a while (months) ... someone kills a deer ... should he:

1. eat what he wants and let the rest go to waste?
2. share it with other stranded people?

3. I will eat the tenderloin and chops and depending on who else is hungry offer other cuts for services. Maybe one guy has to fetch water every day for a couple weeks for some rib meat. Maybe I have a lady give me a nice massage everyday for a few weeks for the deer pelt to keep her kids warm. I could offer up nice shoulder to the kids if they keep the camp clean and remove the waste. No free rides...everyone has to contribute and only i get the tenderloin since I shot the deer (unless of course i would fancy some other services, then I might share the tenderloin ).

woot

EmBleve

_ wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

gaining and obtaining welth isn't a personal acheivement?

No, it's not. Not to the extent you think it is, anyway.

I was waiting for you.

_

Blockhead wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

sure do...
But is giving money or GPA really helping their cause? It may temporarily but we need life long solutions not band-aids.

so is the alternative of letting people starve or languish in poverty the better choice?

No the alternative is putting that money into programs that will help the children. A welfare mom is not helping her family by continually have more children with no dad(s) So since the Gov. is already basically raising the children anyways we should create programs (afterschool) that can better their lives, and educate them on real world issues. Also use a voucher only systems, where they are not given money, but vouchers on basic needs and certin food items. Create a system to stop the selling the food stams for drugs or money. Its as simple as showing an id for the food you purchase on vouchers. That wouldn't even cost any money. I could come up with a million examples that would help these people. But cutting a check and turning a blind eye to the abuse is not helping.

So what happened to your proposal to take all poor people's children away & put them in a group home or foster care? And, if you really don't want to sound like an elitist prick, stop saying "these people".

_

Blockhead wrote:

I go my CIvil Engineering degree from UK.

You have a degree in Civil Engineering? From the United Kingdom?? :? And, just to help clarify a discussion I was having the other day, do civil engineers need master's degrees?

_

EmBleve wrote:

_ wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

gaining and obtaining welth isn't a personal acheivement?

No, it's not. Not to the extent you think it is, anyway.

I was waiting for you.

I don't know if that's good or bad, but it made me laugh anyway.

Blockhead

_ wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

I go my CIvil Engineering degree from UK.

You have a degree in Civil Engineering? From the United Kingdom?? :? And, just to help clarify a discussion I was having the other day, do civil engineers need master's degrees?

University of Kentucky. I have my Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering. You do not NEED a maters to obtain a degree in Civil Engineering. I am not licensed though as my company is more of a Construction / Facilities management. Maybe someday though...