Whether it was a story or not it would have happened. I really liked your post there, Asd. Made lots of sense.
Why on earth would I spend my Frkin time, wasting years to become a doctor working for other people when, instead, I could just spend my life at a shoe factory probably getting more hours (therefore money) in
Probably it's true if we consider that the ones who study keep studying, though the ones who don't study, study even less now because of the average out.
Just because it happens doesn't mean its not a story.
Lol blu, make an argument on why that wouldn't happen to society
You are working for personal gain in Socialism. If you do your job, everyone gains, if everyone gains so do you.
Pretty simple, it's not my fault his entire class were idiots and didn't realize the simple way to do well. Rather than some work for an A, and some for a C (which by the way probably wouldn't average a B) EVERYONE works for a B
The best solution in this case was the good students getting still an A and the less good ones getting a B, which averages at least a B+. So everybody is happy.
But if you dont do your job, you still gain. Not all people are willing to work for the betterment of society.
Social loafing, which is a well documented and proven psychological phenomenon, states that when working in a group, people do not work as hard as they would alone. The sad truth is, that people would rather have the work done for them if given the opportunity.
A professor performs an experiment on his pro-socialist classroom. He decides to average out, or socialize, the test scores. Everyone in the class gets a B. The people who didn't study were happy, those who would have gotten an A werre pissed. The next week, students studied a little less, why bother, if you wont get the score you worked for? The class average was a C. the next week, the average was an F.
First I bet that was made up and two, has nothing to do with socialism.
Social loafing, which is a well documented and proven psychological phenomenon, states that when working in a group, people do not work as hard as they would alone. The sad truth is, that people would rather have the work done for them if given the opportunity.
Well obviously. The grounds on which the experiment was done was quite stupid. These theories try to make every aspect of men into very complex phenomenons, but it all comes down to the reasoning of men and their objective of their reasoning.
He found that when he asked a group of men to pull on a rope, that they did not pull as hard, or put as much effort into the activity, as they did when they were pulling alone. The main reason is that the social loafer or "free-rider" believes that their personal work is not being evaluated.
Obviously, why would you pull hard on a rope. You would need to give a cause that the whole group can believe in. To gather data from an experiment that asks that you should pull the rope for the sake of an experiment is fallacious as it undermines the social reasoning.
And yet, I don't see what this has to do with socialism anyway.
Socialism is collective thought. It asks people to act for the good of the community rather than the individual. Social loafing fits perfectly. People just don't work as hard if they don't reap the full rewards. Unless you are suggesting that people be brainwashed, it wont work.
Socialism is collective thought. It asks people to act for the good of the community rather than the individual. Social loafing fits perfectly. People just don't work as hard if they don't reap the full rewards. Unless you are suggesting that people be brainwashed, it wont work.
Then why do CEO's and other high officials get paid obscenely high pay checks and just sit around playing golf, when the people doing the real work get payed maybe 50-65 thousand a year?
Drace, it has EVERYTHING to do with socialism. I like how you first tried to discredit it, then distance yourself from it.
Every advancement in society has happened because people acted on their own self interest.
Using an analogy of a classroom to compare to a world sized workers cooperative is completely fallacious as removes many aspects that affect thought.
It seems people only use analogies when it betters their side of view. They try and not argue on the real issue but create a bastardized situation of it that shows its side to be better.
Ill create an analogy on the same situation.
A group of 10 men are trying to each trying to collect 100 tokens. There are a total of 1000 tickets and so everyone get get enough. When the men work alone to find the tickets, each individual has to look over the whole area themselves. But when in a group everyone shares part of the land to search and finds things easier and everyone is happy. Awesome
Every advancement in society has happened because people acted on their own self interest.
Socialism is fully compatible with self interest.
Socialism is collective thought. It asks people to act for the good of the community rather than the individual. Social loafing fits perfectly. People just don't work as hard if they don't reap the full rewards. Unless you are suggesting that people be brainwashed, it wont work.
In an advanced society as ours, people NEED to work together in order to maintain such a materialistic society. It is of purely self interest to want to collaborate in such a society.
Social lifting is simply the reasoning that "Whats the point of this"? They told people to pull a rope, and they didn't do it as hard as they would individually simply because there was no reason to.
Because this aint capitalism. Government is helping those assholes keep their money. If the free-market did it's work, those guys would be out on the street. No bailouts for them. No government help for them. They screw up, they don't pay their workers, nobody buys their stuff.
