School grade example of socialism

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:04 AM
link   
www.newsninja2012.com...


An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama’s socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.


Edit: this article is fake and I missed the disclosure of that because of adds. The point remains regardless though.

and this...is beautiful.

1)You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.

2)What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3)The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.

4)You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!.

5)When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

Personally I find this to be pretty spot on. You can't have a regulated free market...just like you can't have a regulated free people.

Personally I feel that the reason capitalism appears to be the bad guy is because the government is an open opportunity to leverage your business...The government should learn to abide by the constitution and this kind of abuse wouldn't be possible.

Many fail to understand the mentality behind successful business, its calculated and rarely utilizes emotion...it makes the most logical and practical decision possible as many times as possible...when you have a whore of a government that gets in bed with everyone free of charge...then that pony is going to be rode hard and put away wet...all day every day.

That is exactly what is happening...the constitution limited governmental power so people couldn't BUY the government and enslave the people. The government with limitation isn't an asset nor an interest to business/corporations...but a government without limitation? Well that is an asset that will be bought and sold 10 fold and used to its fullest extent...

Who is John Galt?
edit on 9-1-2014 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)
edit on 9-1-2014 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Sly1one
 


I want to shake this mans hand. Great job. It scares me that these so called college students don't understand simple economics. Anyways, thank you for sharing, made my day a little better!



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Sly1one
when Obama’s Socialism Experiment Fails

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that Obama’s socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.


and this...is beautiful.


No, it is just a hoax... try reading the whole article!



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:13 AM
link   
reply to post by hellobruce
 


Well thanks for that little enlightenment...with all the "add" garbage on the page I didn't realize there was more.

Having said that...the points remain the same...I would love to see this experiment done in the classroom though.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:15 AM
link   

hellobruce
No, it is just a hoax... try reading the whole article!



Proving yet again that ATS users dont bother to read their own references before rushing to make a new thread.

Proving yet again that most ATS users dont bother to read the cited article before commenting on it.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:16 AM
link   
reply to post by hellobruce
 


It's a shame it didn't really happen, as most colleges these days seem to spout dogma as opposed to the sharing of ideas in a intellectually cultivating environment.

What scares me is that most students and professors operate on the assumption that there is only one correct political philosophy these days.

Sadly though, this newer generation would probably have any professor that would do this sacked, sued, tarred and feathered.
edit on 9-1-2014 by TurtleSmacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:24 AM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 


Hi and thanks...I edited the op to add the correction. I thought I had read the whole article because there were adds between the initial text and the disclosure... Simple mistake really

If there is any better way to correct this oversight please let me know.
edit on 9-1-2014 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Sly1one
 


I would say that's more communism than anything Obama is offering.. The rich and poor divide has grown during Obama's reign.

I don't understand why people in America think that the Democrats are Socialist and the Republicans are Capitalist. They're both pretty much exactly the same, Democrats slightly more central than the republics but you don't have a choice of anything other than a right wing party in the states.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:57 AM
link   
Cool example but it's a very simplistic view of socialism...

I wonder what the example would look like if capitalism were used as a grading system?

Would only 1% of the class be allowed to get an A?

Some of those 1% that get an A simply get an A because their parents got an A. They don't even have to study. They just party all day long and don't even have to write the exams. They just get an A.

Some people get high grades even though their fellow classmates did all the study work...

Some people would get lesser grades simply because they were female or from a different race.

Would there be only 100% available for grading? If there are 100 people in the class and let's say 40% would be given to the top 1% of the class, that means that only 60% is left to be divided amongst the other 99 people...?

...

And so on...

At least not all of the students would fail as with a socialist grading system?



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 04:57 AM
link   
Every time this story goes up on boards (which it does, often and regularly) I find it frustrating that so many simply buy it without question.

Without comment upon Obama’s programs in particular, the principles here, of collectivism, are not being looked at in their entirety.

I live in a country which puts these principles to work, and although not perfect (as no country is) the results are NOT what is predicted here. The country is extremely productive, and second only to Germany in Europe.

The missing elements in this prediction is culture. The predicted outcomes are correct for a nation with a culture of individualism. For peoples who will only consider their own comfort and desires.

When a nation has a culture of collectivism, solidarity and the good of the whole is valued higher than that of the individual. It is believed that, if an individual puts the good of the whole first, than in the long run, it will benefit the individual. (in the same way it is considered in capitalism that concern for self will ultimately end up being good for the whole- they see an interdependence in the long term, just circulating the other way around).

They also consider that each man is the keeper of his brother- meaning that peer pressure is a good thing. It is GOOD to listen to the feedback and reactions of those around you- it gives you important information on your effect within the society, and saves you from the short-sightedness of ego.
There is none of this “don’t follow the crowd” lessons- quite the opposite.

Work is not done for personal pleasure and fulfilment. It is a duty to the society, that each does in order to remain a member and benefit from the protection, mating rights, and access to resources and trade.

Here, what would happen under these same conditions is that those who did not work hard and brought down the average would get a lot of pressure and criticism from their hard working peers, and would take that seriously- it would motivate them. Risk of ostracization is a real threat. You would end up with a B average pretty constantly, due to different capacity and abilities.

Within the group of students, the ones who are carrying a heavier load would also be recognized and given a higher position of respect and power. The others become dependant upon them. You would be surprised what people will do to get that sort of power over peers!

We americans tend to look for acknowledgement from official authorities, or material gain. The collectivist values much more the esteem and respect of peers.

Also, there is the assumption that people will choose to either be a receiver or a giver….
In a culture which values interdependence, they each see themselves as both. For example, people pay taxes to make it possible for everyone to have paid sick leave or vacations. Everyone takes theirs at different times. While one is working, another vacations, and then they switch places. They don’t mind working to pay for another to have a vacation, because that is exactly how they too, will get a vacation.

Identifying with our fellow countrymen, instead of trying to differenciate and compete with them, gives a totally different result!

I am not saying it is a better system of values. I am saying that it is being misunderstood here. I also think that applying the same methods and systems in the US would not work because of the difference in culture.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 06:53 AM
link   

TurtleSmacker
reply to post by hellobruce
 


It's a shame it didn't really happen, as most colleges these days seem to spout dogma as opposed to the sharing of ideas in a intellectually cultivating environment.

What scares me is that most students and professors operate on the assumption that there is only one correct political philosophy these days.

Sadly though, this newer generation would probably have any professor that would do this sacked, sued, tarred and feathered.
edit on 9-1-2014 by TurtleSmacker because: (no reason given)


Really? How have you managed to attend "most" colleges?

This is one big thread of nonsense with ignorant points made around a fake article and then claims like yours. I wish people would stop trying so hard to find a way to bash Obama and actually engage in reality and facts for a change.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Gemwolf
Cool example but it's a very simplistic view of socialism...

I wonder what the example would look like if capitalism were used as a grading system?

Would only 1% of the class be allowed to get an A?

Some of those 1% that get an A simply get an A because their parents got an A. They don't even have to study. They just party all day long and don't even have to write the exams. They just get an A.

Some people get high grades even though their fellow classmates did all the study work...

Some people would get lesser grades simply because they were female or from a different race.

Would there be only 100% available for grading? If there are 100 people in the class and let's say 40% would be given to the top 1% of the class, that means that only 60% is left to be divided amongst the other 99 people...?

...

And so on...

At least not all of the students would fail as with a socialist grading system?


Actually, what you describe is a cronyist state, not capitalism.

Capitalism assumes that those who succeed do so one their own merit and solely on their own merit within the rules of the system and everyone plays by the same rules.

So, in a truly capitalist system, the teacher would clearly lay down the grading parameters, outline the expected coursework and students would succeed or fail based on how well they fulfilled those requirements. There would be as many As as there are students who bother or manage to do A grade work.

In a cronyist state, it's about who you know and whether or not you're lucky enough to fall in with people who can write the rules in your favor. That's the type of system we have today, and that system is trending toward a socialist democracy which isn't any better because it's just as cronyist.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Buttonlip

TurtleSmacker
reply to post by hellobruce
 


It's a shame it didn't really happen, as most colleges these days seem to spout dogma as opposed to the sharing of ideas in a intellectually cultivating environment.

What scares me is that most students and professors operate on the assumption that there is only one correct political philosophy these days.

Sadly though, this newer generation would probably have any professor that would do this sacked, sued, tarred and feathered.
edit on 9-1-2014 by TurtleSmacker because: (no reason given)


Really? How have you managed to attend "most" colleges?

This is one big thread of nonsense with ignorant points made around a fake article and then claims like yours. I wish people would stop trying so hard to find a way to bash Obama and actually engage in reality and facts for a change.


You don't have to. Surveys taken of academics show that most self-identify as liberal.



By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative, says the study being published this week. The imbalance is almost as striking in partisan terms, with 50 percent of the faculty members surveyed identifying themselves as Democrats and 11 percent as Republicans.

The disparity is even more pronounced at the most elite schools, where, according to the study, 87 percent of faculty are liberal and 13 percent are conservative.


Of course, I'm not sure what the claim that college faculty is mostly liberal has to do with Obama.
edit on 9-1-2014 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Buttonlip
 


I find it amusing that you assume I was bashing Obama, I wasnt. My statement about most colleges was based on similar statistics to those pointed out by another member above.

The reality is that students enter the ivory tower totally convinced that liberalism is the perfect and only valuable political philosophy, and that only a select minority of professors ever challenge their viewpoint, I know this owing to research and discussion with the multitude of younger family members currently involved in the university life.

Regardless of your political philosophy, college should be a place where it should be challenged at every turn.

But of course I'm an ignorant, hateful, backwards, unintelligent Republican who just needs to go away so more liberals can return to convincing themselves of how correct their viewpoints are.

edit on 9-1-2014 by TurtleSmacker because: Libertarian, Socialist, Communist, Democrat, or Republican, every philosophy has it's pros and cons.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 01:19 PM
link   
Republicans need a hoax story to pat themselves on the back? *sigh*

How does that story describes socialism? ignorant people arguing without knowing the real meaning of what socialism.

Probably using Fox definition of what socialism is lol.


"if you give into socialism, the Russian will invade and terrorist win"



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 01:45 PM
link   

luciddream

How does that story describes socialism? ignorant people arguing without knowing the real meaning of what socialism.



So you seem to be saying that if the opponents of socialism knew what it really means, they would like it. Or, there's no such thing as knowing enough about something to know that you don't want to know more about it. Not that I'm implying that this is the case here.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by BrianFlanders
 


No, it merely means, understand something before arguing about it. If they call socialism is same as communism and try to make point, it goes nowhere.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 01:48 PM
link   

iRoyalty
I don't understand why people in America think that the Democrats are Socialist and the Republicans are Capitalist. They're both pretty much exactly the same, Democrats slightly more central than the republics but you don't have a choice of anything other than a right wing party in the states.


I guess. If you believe all right wingers are gangsters who force you to buy their protection plan.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   

luciddream
reply to post by BrianFlanders
 


No, it merely means, understand something before arguing about it. If they call socialism is same as communism and try to make point, it goes nowhere.


Well I know enough about socialism to know that I don't need to know more. And even if I didn't know enough about the actual (supposed) doctrine of Marxism/socialsm/communism, I have encountered enough of the advocates of these to know I don't want to meet more of them.

I also know that socialism and communism both came from the same Marxist hydra. This you absolutely cannot deny. The various adherents of Marxism have been more alike more often than not over the many years that they have been trying to force this ideology on people who don't want it. And yes. I said "FORCE". If you tell a socialist you are not interested in what socialism can do for you, that will not be the end of it. Why is that?



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by BrianFlanders
 


I can enlighten you as to why it doesn't end, in the mind of the socialist, you're either a "useful idiot" who never questions the doctrine, or an obstacle to educate as to why you're wrong, evil, backwards, uncaring, malevolent, ect.

Socialism is a philosophy based on the application of force, and unlike classical liberalism or conservatism, seeks to wipe out every competing political philosophy.

The socialist false conscience won't allow the world to be communist, classically liberal, or libertarian, as they truly believe they're saving us from ourselves. I say false conscience because they really don't care, they just want us gone.
edit on 9-1-2014 by TurtleSmacker because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join