Do you want a meritocracy?

[no fat chicks]

And what would that mean?
Would we have to enact certain socialist style controls, free healthcare ( at least for anyone under 25) inheritance re-distribution after a certain point (10 million) and other controls to give everyone a more equal start.

 

[ripskater]

I say we cut our federal govt down massively. And tell people that they need to go get a job and work. Socialism is ruining some countries in Europe.

 

[UpaLoompa]

Sure, with heavy controls like you mention but extended. Given manufacturing advances that are likely to accelerate I also think a minimum salary (or whatever the name is) is necessary.

 

[ehtheist]

No. One of my best attributes is abusing identity politics and nepotism to get ahead. What we have suits me just fine.

 

[no fat chicks]

I say we cut our federal govt down massively. And tell people that they need to go get a job and work. Socialism is ruining some countries in Europe.

So to the children of useless and lazy you say, "too bad".

 

[UpaLoompa]

So to the children of useless and lazy you say, "too bad".

They need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and do a better job making important life choices. Is there a more important life choice than who you pick to be your parents?

Moreover, not only are young children lazy and poor decision makers, they're also more likely to kill you than is a terrorist.

 

[ripskater]

So to the children of useless and lazy you say, "too bad".

No. I'd say come to church, and someone will give you a meal. I believe in charities.

 

[Arkain2K]

And what would that mean?
Would we have to enact certain socialist style controls, free healthcare ( at least for anyone under 25) inheritance re-distribution after a certain point (10 million) and other controls to give everyone a more equal start.

Does it cover fat chicks?

 

[Falsedawn]

No. A meritocracy is inherently flawed in that it is tied to labor, which we should be all striving toward eradicating wholesale for the benefit of our species. Once you get to a point of post-scarcity, meritocracy is a truly archaic concept. Really, capitalism is an archaic concept at that point.

 

[Kalmah]

No. I'd say come to church, and someone will give you a meal. I believe in charities.

Ah yes, the old Molestation for Meals program.

 

[no fat chicks]

No. I'd say come to church, and someone will give you a meal. I believe in charities.

So if your parents aren't Christian or there isn't a church near you, tough luck?

 

[gspieler]

No. I'd say come to church, and someone will give you a meal. I believe in charities.

So, a poor child doesn't deserve to not be malnourished, unless it comes with a side of religion?

Edit: I like charities, too. But it's pretty flawed IMO, though, if your only safety net is predicated on (1) inherently tied-in with religion, and (2) based entirely on the good will of those who are more fortunate.

 

[no fat chicks]

Does it cover fat chicks?

Of course, by weeding them out. Having a non fat body is directly tied to a meritocracy

 

[UpaLoompa]

No. A meritocracy is inherently flawed in that it is tied to labor, which we should be all striving toward eradicating wholesale for the benefit of our species. Once you get to a point of post-scarcity, meritocracy is a truly archaic concept. Really, capitalism is an archaic concept at that point.

Interesting. What about with a guaranteed minimum income / living standard? Should contributions, e.g. artistic, intellectual, etc. be awarded beyond that or simply rely on the assumption that people will pursue and excel at what they're inclined toward?

 

[ripskater]

So if your parents aren't Christian or there isn't a church near you, tough luck?

There are churches everywhere in the USA.

 

[no fat chicks]

Once again rip shows he only cares about ideology and not people.

 

[ripskater]

So, a poor child doesn't deserve to not be malnourished, unless it comes with a side of religion?

Edit: I like charities, too. But it's pretty flawed IMO, though, if your only safety net is predicated on (1) inherently tied-in with religion, and (2) based entirely on the good will of those who are more fortunate.

I don't think a church would turn a hungry man away from a meal for saying he was a non believer. I know some un believers on here, and if they showed up, I'd give them a meal.

 

[UpaLoompa]

I don't think a church would turn a hungry man away from a meal for saying he was a non believer. I know some un believers on here, and if they showed up, I'd give them a meal.

Mother Theresa says... GTFO you heathen.

 

[no fat chicks]

There are churches everywhere in the USA.

I see so how will the church's pay for all these people, they won't be getting that much from their members. Unless of course they must enact some sort of levee on its parish, a tax if you will to take care of the less fortunate members. What a novel system. Too bad we don't have a real world equivalent. . .

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

No. I'd say come to church, and someone will give you a meal. I believe in charities.

Or maybe come to church and get killed by a racist nutjob.