Do you want a meritocracy?

[Falsedawn]

I.e. Star Trek.

I like it.

That's actually what drew me to post-scarcity as a concept, then getting into what could actually bring it about. Reading Marx is what actually made me believe it was feasible, though I differ from him in that I believe that it is inevitable. Capitalism does have controls to prevent such a future given that basically every cost has to be justified with some sort of benefit, but we eventually reach the point where the difference in efficiency becomes so stark that it becomes impossible to justify large scale human labor. Ironically, to me, the end game of capitalism is the most prosperous communist society in existence.

I can see that. There's no particular moral reason why we'd order our economic system to reward wealth creation (or especially rent-seeking), but there has been a good practical reason. If that no longer holds, we should definitely reconsider. I don't think we're there yet, though.

100% agree, which is why I somewhat struggled with the OP's question at first. Short term, we should be largely meritocratic with controls to prevent the misuse of wealth. Long term though, technology is going to change how we view society at its foundation. Better to get ahead of it, work out the foundational theory, and push for it as quickly as possible. Now THAT is a pipe dream, but I'm hopeful for the near future.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

the average person is worthless, not sure how people don't realize that by now. any random skit where they ask people random questions off the street should show that. I mean, for real, how many people do you think in the US know whom the VP is? 40%? i'm thinking that's high.

why all these people, whom contribute largely nothing to society all have to have a 'liveable wage' is beyond me. shit tier skills and knowledge earn you shit tier pay, not that complicated.

 

[UpaLoompa]

the average person is worthless, not sure how people don't realize that by now. any random skit where they ask people random questions off the street should show that. I mean, for real, how many people do you think in the US know whom the VP is? 40%? i'm thinking that's high.

why all these people, whom contribute largely nothing to society all have to have a 'liveable wage' is beyond me. shit tier skills and knowledge earn you shit tier pay, not that complicated.

In all likelihood this means you're shit tier too. If I'm smarter and can beat you up, I guess I should just come and take all your shit.

Also, if you're going to use "whom", please use it properly.

 

[Falsedawn]

the average person is worthless, not sure how people don't realize that by now. any random skit where they ask people random questions off the street should show that. I mean, for real, how many people do you think in the US know whom the VP is? 40%? i'm thinking that's high.

why all these people, whom contribute largely nothing to society all have to have a 'liveable wage' is beyond me. shit tier skills and knowledge earn you shit tier pay, not that complicated.

To the truly exceptional, you and I are average.

I totally understand your position, but I pray that the majority of humanity does not hold it. The world is not a just place, and attaching someone's worth to their pay (absent any extant factors that could be contributing to that pay) makes me shudder inside.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

In all likelihood this means you're shit tier too. If I'm smarter and can beat you up, I guess I should just come and take all your shit.

Also, if you're going to use "whom", please use it properly.

Not at all. I actually generally owe money on taxes while claiming 0, read into that as you may. Sorry about the typo, but you're totally right, being a condescending douche is a great counterpoint.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

also, taking others shit? wait, what? what are you talking about? that literally has nothing to do w/ anything in this thread.....

 

[panamaican]

Sorry, I was using currency in a different manner. How is merit quantified?

No problem, that was my first assumption but didn't want to be wrong.

In my mind, when I'm talking about a true meritocracy then it's a largely government run system. Ostensibly, you'd have to take infants from their mothers and oversee their development through college. Sort of a Gattaca/Sparta hybrid model.

Post college, people can pursue whatever outcomes they want. Athletics, STEM, the arts, the trades, etc. but without the benefit of relying on their parents and parental relationships.

 

[panamaican]

To the truly exceptional, you and I are average.

I totally understand your position, but I pray that the majority of humanity does not hold it. The world is not a just place, and attaching someone's worth to their pay (absent any extant factors that could be contributing to that pay) makes me shudder inside.

He works for the government. Any time he starts his anti-poor people spiel, I'm baffled. If someone is not in the private sector and actually having to prove they deserve their spot. And have to generate/save for their own retirement. If they're not doing that then their opinion on what poor people can/can't do is just dramatically removed from reality.

Anyone can save for retirement when you work for the one employer who gives the best benefits, still pays an unreasonable pension and almost never fires anyone, lol. Poor people should all work for the government.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

He works for the government. Any time he starts his anti-poor people spiel, I'm baffled. If someone is not in the private sector and actually having to prove they deserve their spot. And have to generate/save for their own retirement. If they're not doing that then their opinion on what poor people can/can't do is just dramatically removed from reality.

Anyone can save for retirement when you work for the one employer who gives the best benefits, still pays an unreasonable pension and almost never fires anyone, lol. Poor people should all work for the government.

our pension is only 1%, it's essentially nothing, i'm not a civil servant, i work for the Marine Corps. Please, tell me more though...

my position also requires a Masters, which inherently implies that you are earning keep and have been educated or trained. In other words, poor people don't qualify for mine nor a majority of positions as you have to be skilled or a SME in some field. I'm not a janitor at the chow hall ffs

 

[HunterSdVa29]

also, maybe you're uninformed, but i also pay the exact same tax rates as everyone else, straight from IRS Pub 15......so i have just as much right as any taxpayer to criticize where my money gets redistributed too

 

[UpaLoompa]

Not at all. I actually generally owe money on taxes while claiming 0, read into that as you may. Sorry about the typo, but you're totally right, being a condescending douche is a great counterpoint.

You're lambasting "average" people while chances are you're quite average at many things, be they physical or intellectual (e.g. grammatical). Who is to say that the currency you value is the one on which a meritocracy would operate? Your current income is not necessarily relevant to that, unless we hold Kim Kardashian out as some paragon of merit.

And yes, given the tone of your whole post, being condescending was quite appropriate.

also, taking others shit? wait, what? what are you talking about? that literally has nothing to do w/ anything in this thread.....

Actually it does. How about a meritocracy on the basis of your ability to hold onto what you acquire?

 

[Ruprecht]

Well... a full meritocracy would probably involve kids being nursed and raised in communal creches with equal access to education and other resources, and with streaming according to ability occurring at an early age.
So no, that's not a system I'd advocate.
Aside from that though, meritocracy in terms of maximising individual potential through public access to a high standard of healthcare and education? Absolutely.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

You're lambasting "average" people while chances are you're quite average at many things, be they physical or intellectual (e.g. grammatical). Who is to say that the currency you value is the one on which a meritocracy would operate? Your current income is not necessarily relevant to that, unless we hold Kim Kardashian out as some paragon of merit.

And yes, given the tone of your whole post, being condescending was quite appropriate.

Actually it does. How about a meritocracy on the basis of your ability to hold onto what you acquire?

If standardized tests are to be believed, than no i'm not. I'm not the one defining the currency, you either have value or you don't. People on social welfare, by default, don't or else they'd be able to support themselves. It's not that complicated....

And we have laws, this isn't anarchy. Why are you bringing that up, tactically acquiring stuff through presumed force? either way, i wouldn't be too concerned. Spent a year in Afghanistan, think i'll be allright

 

[panamaican]

our pension is only 1%, it's essentially nothing, i'm not a civil servant, i work for the Marine Corps. Please, tell me more though...

I've told you this directly. The Marines (and I have family who are former Marines) are a branch of the military. The military is a part of the government. It's a government job. It's not the private sector. It's funding comes from the tax dollars of others. It doesn't go out and compete for it's funding.

That you pay taxes doesn't change that. So I always find it a bit out of touch when you discuss things as if you're not working for the government and are slogging through the private sector proving yourself from day 1. Your "company" is never going out of business. It's never competing under capitalist rules. It's a government job.

That doesn't diminish my respect for those who serve. Part of how we show that respect is through the significant amount of funding and tax dollars we spend trying to keep our service people at the cutting edge of their fields. But it's still a government job when you're talking about market economies.

 

[panamaican]

also, maybe you're uninformed, but i also pay the exact same tax rates as everyone else, straight from IRS Pub 15......so i have just as much right as any taxpayer to criticize where my money gets redistributed too

And I've told you this before:

ALL of your pay comes from other people paying taxes. So whatever you pay back in taxes is just a discount to the taxpayer. You're not getting money from the free markets and kicking a portion to the government. You are the government and kicking a portion back to yourself, lol.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

I've told you this directly. The Marines (and I have family who are former Marines) are a branch of the military. The military is a part of the government. It's a government job. It's not the private sector. It's funding comes from the tax dollars of others. It doesn't go out and compete for it's funding.

That you pay taxes doesn't change that. So I always find it a bit out of touch when you discuss things as if you're not working for the government and are slogging through the private sector proving yourself from day 1. Your "company" is never going out of business. It's never competing under capitalist rules. It's a government job.

That doesn't diminish my respect for those who serve. Part of how we show that respect is through the significant amount of funding and tax dollars we spend trying to keep our service people at the cutting edge of their fields. But it's still a government job when you're talking about market economies.

I've never said a single one of those things you're referring too. I have never denied working the government, it was when you and JVS tried to equate that w/ being on welfare (laughable at best, being a straight up ignorant hater at worst) that i took offense to that characterization....

I hold people accountable to support themselves, where they work is irrelevant. They earn enough to provide, or they mooch off those that do....

Where i work has literally nothing to do with that, and again, there's no reason to bring it up really

 

[UpaLoompa]

If standardized tests are to be believed, than no i'm not.

I am quite sure I know people much, much smarter than you. Do you think you're going to impress people in an anonymous forum with allusions to IQ, SATs, or GREs?

I'm not the one defining the currency, you either have value or you don't.

What is this "value" you speak of?

People on social welfare, by default, don't or else they'd be able to support themselves. It's not that complicated....

So their income determines their value? What if they used to have a high income but now are old, are they now worthless?

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

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.

Lol this republican myth again.

Find me a republican president who actually cut the size of government.

And what you said about getting a job for people is more republican bullshit. Americans are working longer hours and more jobs than ever before.

Just complete right wing propaganda. And you eat it up like Jesus waffers.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

What is this "value" you speak of?

So their income determines their value? What if they used to have a high income but now are old, are they now worthless?

contributions to society. earning keep, in other words.

Yes, if you're old and have to rely on SS/Medicaid/etc... to survive (b/c you didn't plan properly) you are literally worthless

 

[Prutfis]

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

Don´t worry. Rip (if not a troll) is your typical low iq voter. He most likely flips burgers for a living, will raise his children to be just as stupid as he is, and vote for the people who keep him in poverty.. Pretty much your typical GOP voter.