It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by KSigMason
There is a flaw in the communal belief since not everyone is created exactly. We all different skills and abilities, and because for such things, we each will accumulate different amounts of property (whether land, material, monetary, etc.). Your and the OPs theory would stifle creativity and innovation because no one will have an incentive to do well.
I try to excel to make a better life, not necessarily for me, but for my family. If my property is going to be stolen from my family why would I continue to gather wealth (in whatever form) if my family will not prosper from it?
The system is set up so that the more dependant you are, the less freedom you have. So those on welfare cannot do whatever they want- they are put into a system which limits their movements and choices.
In a way, it is interesting to see how this tends to filter out those who would go into medicine just for the money and practice it badly
But I wanted to pose a question to those who are into the Meritocracy idea? I do'nt know anything about it... I am wondering, what does this ideology do with the people in a society who are limited in abilities? The handicapped, for example, or children? I have a retarded sister, so I've always been very aware of this problem.
Oh yeah- and another problem I see- in leaving your earnings to your family or descendants, you defy the idea of individual merit, don't you? I mean, isn't that how you end up with Paris Hiltons and such? A sort of degenerenscence (is that a word? shouldn't have had wine with dinner!) of the bloodline in the rich, makign softer and softer generations, as they didn't have to work for their wealth... I would think that would be contrary to the meritocracy idea??
Originally posted by ELectricalApprentice
This is just a thread for any interested Freemasons, willing to discuss some of their beliefs and values with a non-Mason.
I'm just wondering, how do Freemasons feel about Meritocratic rule, where a person is advanced in life based on his/her achievements.
I'm also curious to know what Freemasons think about a 100% inheritance tax, in order to ensure that the privileged in the world, don't get to hand down their tremendous wealth to their children, and hopefully, allow every person to start at the same point, have the same opportunity, and prove themselves through their actions.
i'm curious to know what some of those activities are. I mean personal examples, not what I can find by googling "Freemasons Charitable Work".
The Queen of England is the Grand Patroness of Freemasonry
Originally posted by OnTheLevel213
Where do you suppose the newly seized assets will go, but increasing this dependence?
America's medical schools have a way of weeding these people out already; it's called medical school. The process of taking out massive amounts of debt and studying yourself into the ground is an enormously inefficient way of accruing wealth; anyone who's in it solely for the money learns quickly the amount of time they're wasting. As a result, American doctors have the highest quality rate in the world.
It's always Paris Hilton that gets brought up when someone wants to increase the estate tax. What about Peter Buffett or Bill Marriott or Anderson Cooper? Hell, what about Paris Hilton's father Richard? With the exception of Marriott, all of those names became successful starting their own careers; even as the exception, Marriott has created the Marriott Hotels brand as we know it.
Originally posted by Bluesma
Originally posted by OnTheLevel213
Where do you suppose the newly seized assets will go, but increasing this dependence?
Maybe I didn't express clearly what I was saying there- see, if you are dependant here (on welfare...) you do not have freedom, so that is a deterent. It is part of what motivates people to get off the aid.
Originally posted by Bluesma
Maybe I didn't express clearly what I was saying there- see, if you are dependant here (on welfare...) you do not have freedom, so that is a deterent. It is part of what motivates people to get off the aid.
But the healthcare in the US has been rated 37th by the World Healthcare Report and last by the Commonwealth Fund
but I don't want to go too far off subject, just meant to point out, there are humans in the world motivated by things other than money (once their basic survival needs are assured)
(but from what you wrote, those don't seem to be examples of what I was refering to- the kids of the rich who are lazy as a result?)
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
"The Bible speaks of an Omnipotent man in the sky, who had a son who could rise from the dead, but that doesn't make it so."
There is supporting documentation.
Originally posted by AussieAmandaC
and where might that supporting documentation be found aside from the bible Augustus? Please provide a reference or link, or
Do you refer to the light of egypt book?
Or the book which resides in Amenta?
Please tell me if you have seen this with your own eye/s, you must be honest.
The Bible speaks of an Omnipotent man in the sky, who had a son who could rise from the dead, but that doesn't make it so. To be fair I will certainly check out The Regius Poem.
Originally posted by KSigMason
Like I said, communal living and wealth redistribution idea is foolish dream and will never work. It stifles innovation, creativity, and will cause nothing, but stagnation economically, technologically, and educationally.
You should be entitled to what you earn. If you're just going to sit on your ass never doing a thing why should I bust mine just to have my property stolen? That's stupid.
Originally posted by OratoryHeist
If YOU want to work hard, then work hard. If someone wants to sit on their ass, then let them. As long as it's not impacting your life, why does it matter? Do you actually think that if most sat on their ass and done nothing, the burden of holding up society would be all on you?
Originally posted by network dude
Figuratively, yes.
Since this concept is foreign to you think about it like this. You live in a small commune with 13 hippies. You all enjoy eating brownies together and giggling. After the feast of brownies, (which you cooked), everyone else runs off to the flower patch to roll on the ground and watch the clouds. Somebody has to wash the dishes. The next day, all the hippies are hungry again. (amazing how that happens) They all look to you for their brownies. You have to wash the dishes and make more brownies. Is that fair? By your standards it's fine, until you get tired of doing all the work. Then everyone starves and dies a horrible death. The moral of the story is.....communism only works if everyone works. Don't die a horrible death.
Originally posted by OratoryHeist
Interesting network dude, very interesting. Is this what they teach you at Masonic Kindergarten, how to manipulate minds and opinions?
No, clearly he was stating that someone with more money has LESS incentive to be creative, because they're not relying on their innovation to earn their wages.
Originally posted by OratoryHeist
YOU believe money makes someone MORE creative?
Those people achieved what they did through passion and a love for what they do. Through curiosity of the world around them. Not for riches!
Originally posted by network dude
I think that's why the USSR fell. It's obviously very complicated ...
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Originally posted by OratoryHeist
Interesting network dude, very interesting. Is this what they teach you at Masonic Kindergarten, how to manipulate minds and opinions?
Why do keep making snide little comments like this? Masonry is not there to alter one's opinions as it is not structured to do so. I came to Masonry with my own standards and opinions and I can safely assume that everyone else here responding did as well. I was never an advocate for socialistic programs prior to joining Massonry and I would be against them even if I left.
Originally posted by JoshNorton
No, clearly he was stating that someone with more money has LESS incentive to be creative, because they're not relying on their innovation to earn their wages.
Originally posted by OratoryHeist
Not familiar with sarcasm? Not aware of network dude was trying to do?
Originally posted by OratoryHeist
Originally posted by AugustusMasonicus
Originally posted by OratoryHeist
Interesting network dude, very interesting. Is this what they teach you at Masonic Kindergarten, how to manipulate minds and opinions?
Why do keep making snide little comments like this? Masonry is not there to alter one's opinions as it is not structured to do so. I came to Masonry with my own standards and opinions and I can safely assume that everyone else here responding did as well. I was never an advocate for socialistic programs prior to joining Massonry and I would be against them even if I left.
Sarcastic comment. Network dude knows fine well its a more complicated thing than a few hippies, brownies and a field. He was using a simple story to try and point score, a cheap trick to try and win an argument. Hence the sarcasm.
Not familiar with sarcasm? Not aware of network dude was trying to do?
Originally posted by network dude
You are convinced that the world would be a better place if everyone was equal. If all the money and stuff was distributed equally. If I missed that, please fix it for me.
I was simply explaining an instance where your theory fails. Like the story of the ant and the grasshopper. (except they didn't get special brownies) What I describe is not a masonic way of thinking, but MY way of thinking. If other masons happen to agree, then fine.
In closing Mr. Obama, I would like to say that I am deeply saddened by your use of Chicago politics in regard to the bailouts. Dragging all opposed into your office for a closed door meeting, only to have them come out agreeing with you is akin to organized crime. Rahm must be proud. I didn't vote for you either.