What is "fairness?"

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

What if 99% of the citizens didn't agree, but 1% paid handsomely to have the rules written to benefit them?

A fine hypothetical. I didn't agree to the Constitution or the Magna Carta. Nobody ever asked me about whether I agreed murder should be illegal. But those were the rules growing up and we've all been aware of the consequence.

Are you suggesting that disagreement with the rules is good cause for anarchy?

All I'm suggesting is that a majority of those affected by the rules may not have agreed to them beforehand.

And the way our system works right now, a rather small minority has bought and paid for the rulemakers.

How much is the average US Senator worth?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

Try re-reading what I wrote.

as you clearly know, that's not NEARLY as fun

True, dat.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[quade 4]

Quote

I suspect that the people in those other countries think it was very fair.

Going from abject poverty to being essentially a slave is only a minor improvement in anyone's life.

Going from middle-class to poverty is certainly no improvement.

Using one to justify the other is silly and especially when it's your own country you're destroying.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

This is an example of my problem with the free use of the term “fair.” How does one define “fair?” How do you define “fair?” What do you look for to determine “fairness?”

I don't think "fair" or "fairness" has any bearing on how to run a succesful country.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

And the way our system works right now, a rather small minority has bought and paid for the rulemakers.

seems that a rather quiet and small minority (say 1-5%) has bought and paid for about half the rulemakers

it seems that a rather loud and much larger (say 30-40%), but cheaper, minority has paid for the other half

and I can't really discern which rulemakers are pandering to which one or both

seems both minorities cost me about the same and I'm not a fan of what either side wants to do with the money of the rest of us (the leftover majority)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I suspect that the people in those other countries think it was very fair.

Going from abject poverty to being essentially a slave is only a minor improvement in anyone's life.

[quade 4]

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/454/mr-daisey-and-the-apple-factory

And trust me, it's not just Apple . . . it's every company that makes just about any electronic thing you own.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Quote

Quote

What is “fair?”

Fair is following what society agrees upon and codifies in rules. Sometimes we call those laws.

Unfairness is attempting to circumvent that. It's taking a shortcut we all agreed before hand wasn't part of the race. It's playing the game via loopholes rather than just running the damn race.

Ok, just to stir the pot...

What about when the rules and laws are patently unfair, as in discriminatory.

Society here in parts of the US agreed (at least a majority did) that black people shouldn't have the same rights as white people. Those were the rules and laws that (again, a majority of) society imposed.

The idea that a majority imposing it's will on a minority and discriminating against them isn't fair is it??

One of the things I like about the US is that (for the most part, anyway) the rights of the minority are protected to a certain degree.
We're going through a pretty big hulabaloo here in Wisconsin because the governor used a very small majority to stomp on the rights of the minority.

Edit to add:
Quade wrote in the post just above this

Quote

And trust me, it's not just Apple . . . it's every company that makes just about any electronic thing you own.

It's a lot more than electronics. NPR had a story about how many of the factories that Mr Rogers profiled have moved overseas.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[quade 4]

Quote

What about when the rules and laws are patently unfair, as in discriminatory.

Society here in parts of the US agreed (at least a majority did) that black people shouldn't have the same rights as white people. Those were the rules and laws that (again, a majority of) society imposed.

The idea that a majority imposing it's will on a minority and discriminating against them isn't fair is it??

We have a document we use as a check on that. We call it the Constitution. If enough people believe the law in question or even the Constitution itself is unfair, it can be dealt with.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kallend 2,106]

Quote

Quote

This is an example of my problem with the free use of the term “fair.” How does one define “fair?” How do you define “fair?” What do you look for to determine “fairness?”

I don't think "fair" or "fairness" has any bearing on how to run a succesful country.

Sure it does. What happened to Louis XVI, Czar Nicholas, Marie Antoinette etc. when people got pissed off about the lack of fairness in the system.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Was that a "fair" thing to do to humanity?

that's my point. To whom does one value "fairness?" The rules that wee established did harm the companies in the interests of labor. Which was fine - there was a choice made that placed a value on labor. Hence, we didn't have 12 year-old boys dying of black lung from pulling coal trams.

Those were choices that were made. And tonight, I suspect that the President will call for "fairness" by stumping about redistribution of wealth. And many people will find it "fair" to do that.

But fairness to all? I don't think that is something that can be accomplished.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[quade 4]

Quote

To whom does one value "fairness?"

I don't know about you, but I'm ALWAYS going to put humanity above corporations.

I rarely speak in absolutes, but in this case; ALWAYS.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[airtwardo 7]

Too me what's 'fair' depends entirely on through what magnification you're looking.


Look TOO close and nothing in life is fair.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[StreetScooby 5]

This is a really good, recent speech by Rubio:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/286044/rubio-wheres-sense-urgency-kathryn-jean-lopez

May not be totally in line with this thread, but he's spot on with his comments

We are all engines of karma

[winsor 236]

Quote

Quote

This is an example of my problem with the free use of the term “fair.” How does one define “fair?” How do you define “fair?” What do you look for to determine “fairness?”

I don't think "fair" or "fairness" has any bearing on how to run a succesful country.

"Justice is incidental to law and order." John Edgar Hoover

Similar concept.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

This is an example of my problem with the free use of the term “fair.” How does one define “fair?” How do you define “fair?” What do you look for to determine “fairness?”

I don't think "fair" or "fairness" has any bearing on how to run a succesful country.

Cheers! So let's see how often the term "fair" is used tonight in an attempt to get another go at running the country.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[quade 4]

Quote

. . . but he's spot on with his comments

I don't think he is. I think he's operating from a false assumption that it's jealousy of the rich by the poor that is the issue. I don't think it is.

I think it's a matter of contribution.

It's not that the poor don't want the rich to be rich. The poor just wants the rich to pay their fair share.

Earlier you said, "May not be totally in line with this thread . . . ," but I think it is. It speaks directly to this thread in what is and isn't "fair."

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

To whom does one value "fairness?"

I don't know about you, but I'm ALWAYS going to put humanity above corporations.

I rarely speak in absolutes, but in this case; ALWAYS.

That's fine. It's your own moral judgment. We are entitled to those.

But is it "fair" for you to put corporations above humanity? What about those corporations that employ humanity? Those good union jobs that were paid for by the Ford Motor Company? Or those corporations that were retooled and created the machines of war that killed Osama Bin Laden? A human?

Corporations are too much like people - they can be saintly and they can be nefarious. Take a look, for example, at a corporation like the Uninsured Relative Workshop, er, United Parachute Technologies. An example of what plenty of corporations are.

I've seen no reason to hate either. Or to put humanity above them because both were extensions of people. Both are, to me, reflective of the people that run them.

We understand that these companies were/are an extension of people - GOOD people. And putting a stop to them, disfavoring them, etc., would be considered a particularly harmful thing to people we know.

Again, I don't disparage your belief. I just find it to be odd that we deal with corporations every day. And we know that these corporations often are the vision of the humanity behind them.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

The poor just wants the rich to pay their fair share.

What is this in your opinion?

We are all engines of karma

[airtwardo 7]

The poor just wants the rich to pay their fair share.

Quote

•In 2002 the latest year of available data, the top 5 percent of taxpayers paid more than one-half (53.8 percent) of all individual income taxes, but reported roughly one-third (30.6 percent) of income.

•The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 33.7 percent of all individual income taxes in 2002. This group of taxpayers has paid more than 30 percent of individual income taxes since 1995. Moreover, since 1990 this group’s tax share has grown faster than their income share.

•Taxpayers who rank in the top 50 percent of taxpayers by income pay virtually all individual income taxes. In all years since 1990, taxpayers in this group have paid over 94 percent of all individual income taxes. In 2000, 2001, and 2002, this group paid over 96 percent of the total.


So is THAT 'Fair'?

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

• Quote

[dks13827 3]

Fairness to a lib means enabling irresponsible people who are, basically ( actually totally !!! ), dysfunctional people.

[quade 4]

Quote

Quote

The poor just wants the rich to pay their fair share.

What is this in your opinion?

At least a similar proportion to the wages earned, but even that is being pretty generous since a dollar absolutely means more to a poor person than it does to a rich one.

$100 dollars to a poor person might mean the difference between living in a house or living in a cardboard box next month. The same can not be said about the rich.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

So is THAT 'Fair'?

No, it's not fair. To boot, Obama and people like him think they can cover the hole being produced by his policies simply by taking even more. They clearly haven't done the math. Even if they take ALL of the rich people's money, and all corporate profits, there still won't be enough to cover Obama's deficit.

We are all engines of karma

[billvon 3,070]

>Fairness to a lib means enabling irresponsible people who are, basically ( actually
>totally !!! ), dysfunctional people.

And fairness to a conservative means enabling greedy irresponsible people who are basically (actually totally!) without morality.

(And yes, both statements are equally valid.)

[billvon 3,070]

>To boot, Obama and people like him think they can cover the hole being produced by
>his policies simply by taking even more.

And republicans think that they can cover the hole caused by their policies by taking in less money.

Both are, of course, going about this the wrong way. You need to spend less AND take in more to cover the hole.