SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Hard work is often touted as the key American virtue that leads to success and opportunity. And there's lots of evidence to suggest that workers buy into the belief: For example, a recent study found that Americans work 25 percent more hours than Europeans, and that U.S. workers tend to take fewer vacation days and retire later in life. But for many, simply working hard doesn't actually lead to a better life.
In the past, economists have acknowledged that citing hard work as the path to prosperity is overly simplistic and optimistic. Ultimately, whether hard work alone can lift people into better economic conditions is a more complex question. The formula only works if an individual's efforts are met with opportunities for a better life. According to research, it's getting harder and harder for Americans to move up the income ladder.
A new poll from the Strong, Prosperous and Resilient Communities Challenge (SPARCC), an initiative to bolster local economies, found that Americans are quite skeptical of the narrative connecting wealth with personal agency. SPARCC found that 74 percent of those surveyed believed that most poor people work hard, but aren't able to work their way out of poverty due to the lack of economic opportunities. In the U.S., 19 percent of income inequality is attributed to predetermined circumstances such as a person's race, gender, and parental income. The SPARCC report also points to past research showing that economic mobility and health outcomes are greatly affected by geography as evidence that individual hard work won't ensure success because opportunities aren't evenly distributed.
The hard-work argument also plays into the policy discussion around inequality. As Katharine Bradbury and Robert Triest, both economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, write:
Increased inequality may result from increased risk taking and entrepreneurship in an environment of rapid technological change, with some entrepreneurs producing better, or just luckier, innovations than others, and reaping greater rewards. It may also result from increased disparities in work effort, with more industrious individuals earning higher incomes as a result of their greater effort. In both these cases, one could argue convincingly that the increase in inequality is justified and that no remedial changes in public policy are needed. On the other hand, if the increase in inequality results mostly from factors largely beyond the ability of individuals to control or counteract, then a strong case can be made for a public policy response.
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @11:05AM (71 children)
Life isn't fair. Anywhere. Ever.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Wednesday April 12 2017, @11:42AM (53 children)
A popular phrase amongst those who are either being unfair or to whom life has been more than fair. Everyone else, not so much.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday April 12 2017, @12:24PM (51 children)
And yet, entirely true throughout all of history ever.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @12:52PM (48 children)
And yet, entirely true throughout all of history ever.
And? Correct me if I'm misinterpreting anything, but it sounds like you are implying a naturalistic fallacy here in that you are assuming that this outcome is optimal. A 18th century man could make that claim about flying machines, humanism and universal suffrage. Looking into thousands of years of small minded ignorance for inspiration sounds like a poor strategy to me. Our civilization is very immature intellectually, there are no doubt many great ideas we are yet to discover.
(Score: 3, Funny) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday April 12 2017, @01:09PM (47 children)
There's no fallacy. You simply want to impose fairness at my expense and you can go fuck yourself with that.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @01:20PM (25 children)
Yep, that's what we want to do. Better if it was voluntary but you clearly don't care about the less fortunate. So, same to you. And the horse you rode in on.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday April 12 2017, @01:31PM (24 children)
Care has nothing to do with it. I will not allow you, under any circumstance, to steal from me. My life is not their problem and their life is not my fault. If you want to blame and steal from someone for the poverty of children born less than rich, blame those actually at fault; blame their parents. They are legitimately at fault. They chose to have a child while not rich. I had absolutely no say in the decision and will not accept blame or consequences for it having been made.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by PiMuNu on Wednesday April 12 2017, @01:36PM (4 children)
I think the point is that if everyone puts into the pot, everyone's life improves drastically. E.g. if everyone contributes to a highway then everyone has drastic improvement in quality of life from being able to get from A to B.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by slinches on Wednesday April 12 2017, @03:59PM (3 children)
That works with highways because they enable greater productivity through reduced transportation costs. When you make earning a zero sum game (by definition, "income equality" does this), then there have to be people who are hurt to benefit others.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Wednesday April 12 2017, @05:02PM (1 child)
Fair point.
I interpreted TFA as saying that income does not reflect productivity,
But on second reading this is not quite the argument. It is closer to say that productivity is dominated by geographic and other factors. It would be better if productivity was dominated by ability and effort.
(Score: 1) by Chrontius on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:29AM
That's fine - income doesn't reflect productivity. American productivity has gone up much faster than the minimum wage. To quote a study from 2013, "Minimum Wage Would Be $21.72 If It Kept Pace With Increases In Productivity" [huffingtonpost.com]
So - compared to 1968, productivity has gone up three times faster than the minimum wage? Apparently, Americans are working harder and/or smarter than ever, and being paid less for their work that at any time in the last fifty years. Am I reading that right? I think I am, and I'm … not even mad. I'm just disappointed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @06:05PM
It also works with education because that enables greater productivity through reduced employee adaptation costs.
It also works with medicine because it enables greater productivity through reduced healthcare costs.
It also works with politics because it enables greater transparency through increased bullshitting costs.
It also works with parenting because that enables greater social cohesion through reduced household stress.
Your point being?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by moondoctor on Wednesday April 12 2017, @02:04PM
>My life is not their problem
You keep telling yourself that.
The fact that you don't recognise the benefits you receive by living in a society doesn't make what you say true. It's all connected whether you like it or not.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by fustakrakich on Wednesday April 12 2017, @02:11PM
:-) I'm going with Poe's law on all this...
One consideration to make is that humans go through great conscious effort to obstruct other humans. And the real problem is subservience, an apparently very successful survival trait, but it is slowing down progress. We obviously have the means to live like kings, and with much less effort than it takes to maintain the walls we put up
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Wednesday April 12 2017, @02:49PM
They chose to have a child while not rich.
Well, I suppose 95% of the population choosing not to reproduce would solve the overpopulation problem...
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @03:50PM
It appears you have no desire to be part of society. Don't let the door hit your behind on the way out.
(Score: 3, Touché) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday April 12 2017, @05:57PM
I will not allow you, under any circumstance, to steal from me.
Good thing we live in a Democratic Republic, whose constitution explicitly grants the right to levy taxes, then, eh? Makes the stealing bit unnecessary.
(Score: 3, Touché) by DeathMonkey on Wednesday April 12 2017, @06:34PM
They chose to have a child while not rich. I had absolutely no say in the decision...
Voting for anti-abortion politicians is having a say in the decision.
(Score: 3, Touché) by julian on Wednesday April 12 2017, @08:14PM
I'm brought a great measure of happiness knowing you have to pay taxes and pitch in to help improve civilization whether you like it or not :)
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 13 2017, @01:09PM (11 children)
Just be careful that your death is not their salvation lest the last words you hear be "life isn't fair!".
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday April 13 2017, @02:06PM (10 children)
Stolen money is never anyone's salvation. Just the opposite, in fact. No society has ever benefited from having a large and growing population of thieves.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 13 2017, @03:06PM (9 children)
Given that we have more than enough resources out there to allow everyone to live a middle class lifestyle, but some people have gold toilets and some are living in poverty, I wonder who the thieves are?
Let's apply some logic to a scenario. Two people. One has an empty house with no car and the other has a house filled with 2 TVs, 2 dining room tables, 2 cars, etc, etc. Which one is most likely to be a thief?
BTW, growing wealth inequality is generally a symptom of a failing state.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday April 13 2017, @03:24PM (8 children)
No, you do not. You know who they are and do not want to admit it. A thief is someone who takes something not freely given. Period.
Wealth inequality is a fallacy. Fiat currency based economics is not a zero-sum game. Someone having more does not mean what you have is reduced.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:12PM (7 children)
Yes, for example the fruits of one's labor. Paying less than enough to live on for full time employment is an example of stealing the fruits of someone else's labor.
Coercion takes many forms.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday April 13 2017, @09:31PM (6 children)
No, sweety. Employment is a contract. If you dislike the terms, either argue for better terms or take your business elsewhere. Once you accept the terms, you have agreed that what the employer is offering you is what you deserve. There is no moral component to pay rates.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 13 2017, @09:56PM (5 children)
Sorry, but there certainly is, as long as the potential employee is bent over a barrel by the need for income. One day, perhaps you can complete remedial kindergarten and you'll understand.
Many people understand that law and ethics is considerably more complex than Bartertown.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday April 14 2017, @12:24AM (4 children)
One day you'll pull your head out of Marx's asshole and realize nobody owes you a fucking thing in this life. Not an equal start. Not a job that pays what you want. And certainly not comfort.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Friday April 14 2017, @01:31AM (3 children)
Who hurt you? What could possibly made you that hurtful and indifferent to everyone?
May I suggest you exile yourself to a desolate island? You seem to want to be isolated and the landscape would match your insides.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday April 14 2017, @10:46AM (2 children)
I'm not indifferent to everyone. People down on their luck I tend to help when I'm able. Thieves like you I wouldn't piss on if you were on fire though.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Friday April 14 2017, @01:41PM (1 child)
Says the thief.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday April 14 2017, @02:21PM
[Citation Needed]
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @03:56PM (1 child)
There's no fallacy. You simply want to impose fairness at my expense and you can go fuck yourself with that.
That is also a fallacy. The motivation of the speaker has no bearing on the validity of their statement.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @12:01AM
That is also a fallacy.
It is the "Mightly Buzzurd Horse-fucking fallacy", so named after a libertaritard who pulled his own self up by his boot straps to reach the rear-end of someone else's horse, and then has the temerity to complain about theft. Out in the Old West, where I come from, they hang horse rapers.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday April 12 2017, @07:18PM (18 children)
Yep, you got your unfair advantage and you plan to keep it. Stay on top by pul;ling everyone else down.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday April 13 2017, @02:13PM (17 children)
Deciding to have a child when you are poor is what causes that child to be born with less advantages than others. Nobody else had a say in that child's conception so any unfairness is entirely attributable to the child's parents. Thus any remedy must be logically made by said parents or you do nothing but introduce further unfairness to otherwise uninvolved people and train a child to believe it is entitled to things it has not earned. Obviously someone has trained you in such a manner and our society suffers from it.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 13 2017, @02:27PM (16 children)
So what of the child? Said child never participated in a decision to be at a disadvantage. That includes the disadvantage of not being able to afford to your standards to fulfill the biological imperative to reproduce.
It does, however, amuse me to draw parallels between your prescription and Communist China's one child policy. How does it feel to stand side by side with Chairman Mao?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday April 13 2017, @03:18PM (15 children)
See above re: blame and accountability. The parents of said child are the only ones responsible for its lot in life and are the only ones obligated to do anything about it.
Biological imperative my ass. We are rational beings and override "biological imperatives" every single day.
You're being intentionally obtuse. I did not say that anyone should not reproduce. I simply laid blame for the results of said reproduction firmly where it belongs. Personal accountability, you should try it sometime.
Further, you seem to think that it is somehow moral for a mob to steal from someone while it is not for an individual to. This is incorrect. There is no action under the sun that it is moral for a group to take that it is immoral for an individual to take. Numbers do not confer righteousness any more than power does.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:19PM (14 children)
I noticed you skipped over the part about the child having no part in the decision. Are you proposing original sin?
As for the rest, correct, the gang of thieves in the 0.1% who have stolen the wealth of the remaining 99.9% should return it immediately.
As for personal responsibility, that's hilarious coming from mister "that's not my problem".
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday April 13 2017, @09:28PM (13 children)
It was irrelevant. When you know where the fault lies, all there is to do is correctly attribute it and seek reparations from said source.
And how were the taxes that you propose to pay for all this acquired? At gunpoint, that's how. Every tax dollar collected is an act of theft. Every single proponent of taxing some to benefit others is by definition a thief. As are those who receive the stolen lucre.
See, you don't even know what personal responsibility means. It means that every choice I make, I am entirely responsible for; every choice you make, you are entirely responsible for. And nothing else.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 13 2017, @10:33PM (12 children)
So how do you get reparations from someone who doesn't have any resources?
Now quit stealing valuable oxygen, you didn't pay for it.
And actually, you also benefit from a more balanced society. For one, it tends to last longer without desperate people revolting in order to have a decent life.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday April 14 2017, @12:21AM (11 children)
You don't. They fucked you right proper and there's not a thing you can do about it. And there's nothing anyone else is obliged to do about it. Anything you rightfully get is voluntary charity out of the goodness of people's hearts.
So, you're saying "wouldn't it be a shame if something happened to your nice suburban community"? And you wonder why I call you a thief...
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Friday April 14 2017, @01:34AM (10 children)
Anything you rightfully get is voluntary charity out of the goodness of people's hearts.
So you're saying there is none in yours?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday April 14 2017, @10:43AM (9 children)
Nope. I'm saying if someone comes to my home asking for a ride to the dollar store for some food because they don't have a car, they'll get it. If, however, they attempt to redistribute what wealth I have to themselves, I will shoot them in the head. Charity is a fine thing. Thievery is not. Period.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Friday April 14 2017, @01:38PM (8 children)
The social safety net is nothing more or less than society believing that charity will go further if it is pooled and managed by an expert. Why be pestered a hundred times a day for spare change when you can take care of it with a reasonable tax?
Your statement is also very convenient when you don't live near where the people who might need such help can walk to your door. Out of sight, out of mind.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday April 14 2017, @02:29PM (7 children)
Neither convenience nor efficiency is an excuse for theft. Try again.
*Bzzzzt* Wrong again. You shouldn't project so hard. It'd do you good to remember that you libtards are the least charitable of any political affiliation in the U.S. While everyone else is helping their neighbor, you're stealing from them.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Friday April 14 2017, @02:39PM (6 children)
Now read your sigline. ROTFL
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday April 14 2017, @02:56PM (5 children)
That's not a caricature and it's not an opinion, slappy. It's a researched and published fact. While we're giving out our own money, you lot are giving out money that you've stolen.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Friday April 14 2017, @04:04PM (4 children)
Sorry, wrong. What lot is it you think I am? I look in the mirror and see one person.
Still ROTFL, more so now that you've shown your blind spot.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday April 14 2017, @11:06PM (3 children)
I think you're one of the thieves than wants to take what I've earned, give it to someone who thinks they deserve it for having done nothing, and call it charity instead of theft. That's plenty.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Friday April 14 2017, @11:29PM (2 children)
In other words you believe a caricature.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Saturday April 15 2017, @12:31AM (1 child)
No, just your stated position. Accuracy precludes something being a caricature.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Saturday April 15 2017, @01:38AM
You are blinded by your belief. Whatever gets you through the night I guess. I'll be over here giggling at you.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @02:37PM
Life being unfair is something that pieces of shit like you rationalize having more than you deserve while other people haven't even got the means for food and shelter while working large numbers of hours for low rates of pay.
Life isn't fair, is something that refers to things that are chance occurrence, our odds of contracting an infectious disease or getting cancer aren't the same. And sometimes we get screwed over by rare occurrences or somebody else's mistake. It's not something that's properly applied to employers being too cheap and short sighted to offer employees fair compensation.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 13 2017, @04:54PM
Illness causes death tends to be true as well. So if you get double pneumonia will you see a doctor or will you shrug and say "illness causes death".
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Thursday April 13 2017, @08:46AM
No. It is a popular phrase among people who want to take control of their lives and popular thing to laugh at among people who love being a perpetual victim. In fact, among the powerful and powerless, this phrase is the essence of all the other differences.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @12:04PM (16 children)
Yes, that is the problem we need to address. Preferably before the working class decides they've had enough and take matters into their own hands, communist revolutions are never fun for anyone.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday April 12 2017, @01:38PM (15 children)
Preferably before the working class decides they've had enough and take matters into their own hands, communist revolutions are never fun for anyone.
I'm predicting more a right wing one. The working class tends not to like the SJW types very much about now. Today the 60s boomer hippie left is "the man" in charge of everything screwed up which needs to be overthrown. Which puts me in a pickle where I don't want things even more screwed up, but the more things are screwed up the faster we get the right wing takeover I'm happily looking forward to. By analogy something like Germany in the 20s sucked, but you can't have Germany in the 30s without first passing thru Germany in the 20s, sort of.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @01:43PM (2 children)
Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Paul Ryan, Newt Gingrich?
All well known 60s hippies obviously...
Good talk!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @06:49PM (1 child)
Good talk!
VLM is able to talk quite a lot. Not very good, though. He seems not to know that reality has a well known liberal bias, that the right in America is a dwindling minority of less than 12% of the population, and far less of the working class. VLM is a Nazi, advocates concentration camps for migrants! And, Paul Ryan is way too young to have been at Woodstock.
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Thursday April 13 2017, @09:08AM
Reality has no bias, but leftist love self-flagellation.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @02:35PM
The only saving grace here is that you libertarian / co servative types are really so out of touch. You claim there will be a resurgence for your ideologies yet the vast majority of the US population disagrees with you. Cheat your way to victory with gerrymandering and the most terrible propaganda campaign selling ridiculous lies to gullible fools.
Yup, maga indeed as you are being sold out and stolen from.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @02:49PM
More like a 50/50 IMHO.
Out of control divorce, abortion, toxic sexualization, drugs have been implemented first (you thought it was about your freedom, huh?). Crowd control drills, the rise of ubiquitous surveillance has been implemented second, and now the humanitarian/social/economic crises get here.
So, either the irregular army of refugees/immigrants win, and we end up with a totalitarian theocracy, or the incumbents react and we end up with a totalitarian right. Neither of them will go against really powerful interests, because neither of them would be possible without their help. Maintaining armies costs.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @02:53PM (1 child)
I'm predicting more a right wing one.
The right is already the status quo.
The working class tends not to like the SJW types very much about now.
Oh, perish the thought. The SJW types would be the first to die in the fires of the revolution, if such a thing would come to pass. Think more Bolshevik and less Tumblr feminism.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday April 12 2017, @08:55PM
The right is already the status quo.
LOL yeah they sure run the media and academia and hollywood and the music biz and ...
Think more Bolshevik and less Tumblr feminism.
That is an interesting point to consider.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Whoever on Wednesday April 12 2017, @03:17PM
Then you are even more of an idiot than I realized.
Apparently in all of your hard work, you haven't looked at what life is really like under a right-wing takeover. There are many examples in fairly recent history. I'll give you a clue: life is crap for everyone who is not part of a close circle around the leadership. You are looking forward to a crap life. That takes a special kind of stupid.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday April 12 2017, @04:38PM
"Happily looking forward to?" Jesus. If your naive dumb ass thinks you're going to get something you deserve but were prevented from obtaining in your new right-wing dystopia, you are sorely mistaken. This kind of person cares only about themselves. They'll throw you in the gas chamber along with all the people you no doubt refer to as cuck, SJW, etc.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Funny) by julian on Wednesday April 12 2017, @08:20PM (3 children)
By analogy something like Germany in the 20s sucked, but you can't have Germany in the 30s without first passing thru Germany in the 20s, sort of.
Are you Sean Spicer? You want something like 1930s Germany to happen here? You can't think of anything bad that happened there at that time we might want to avoid?
I hope you're sterile or profoundly ugly.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday April 12 2017, @09:25PM (2 children)
I hope you're sterile or profoundly ugly.
LOL
I've noticed that people who oppose the right are just not pleasant to be around. Personal attacks, holiness signalling spirals, holier than thou claims of devoutness, the two minutes hate...
But people that oppose the left are generally pretty good folks. Nice neighbors, easy to get along with, fun to build a civilization with. Much more tolerant, generally.
Its not just one or two people, the stereotypes seem to ring true in general.
The kind of people attracted to political wings says a lot about those wings. The "cool kids" were left wing hippies in the 60s, but as the boomer die off the "cool kids" today are of a somewhat different political view...
(Score: 2) by julian on Wednesday April 12 2017, @09:36PM
But people that oppose the left are generally pretty good folks. Nice neighbors, easy to get along with, fun to build a civilization with. Much more tolerant
Actual Nazis. [npr.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12 2017, @10:19PM
dude
you just described a cocoon or bubble.
you surround yourself with people like yourself and yeah everything is great.
then you start spouting ideas that entire other communities don't like and you act like you are the polite person in a sea of anger. you don't see that everyone else is not like you and equate that the fact you get along with like minded folks somehow makes it so that everyone else are noble savages. I am surprised you haven't expressed white mans burden yet.
no--you are being interpreted as the jerk in the crowd that god sprinkles upon us to make life interesting.
and yeah. there are jerks in the other crowds. some of them are the ones that you take most offense with. but lots of people would prefer to stay in their communities and ignore you as you ignore them -- except politics get in the way of that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 13 2017, @03:32AM
Are you really saying that you would like to see a return of the Nazis? Seriously?!?
(Score: 2) by sjames on Thursday April 13 2017, @05:05PM
Wild guess, you nominate the Muslims for the ovens this time?