Thursday, October 30, 2008

Some ranting

I have some political things I want to write about but maybe later. (And then I went and ended up writing it anyway.)
I'm kind of interested--now that I read some Ayn Rand--in reading more about socialism (the other side.) To briefly sum up what's been going around in my head the past few weeks, I think that NO ONE really wants money to be going to those who don't deserve it. I think at the root, extreme lovers of capitalism like Ayn Rand and socialists probably want the same thing. It's my opinion that laissez-faire capitalism, like she writes about, wouldn't work because our world is NOT objective. Even in our capitalist system, there are people who DO NOT earn money that is equivalent to what they've produced--to what they deserve. Similarly, people earn a lot more than what they deserve. This includes people who have learned how to cheat the system and collect handouts AND really rich people who have managed to get that way without really producing much of worth to people. I'm not giving specific examples because this is a matter of opinion--worth. There will always be "subjective." There will never be a world where everyone agrees on what is worth money and what everyone deserves. The one concrete example I will give is that, if we were in a system where people earned money based on what they deserved, on what they produced, farmers would not be in debt. Farmers would not be poor; they might not be rich (I don't know) but they would not have to worry because they produce something that everyone needs--food. However, that is not our system. So, our capitalism currently is not serving us perfectly. Is the answer more capitalism? Is the answer socialism? Something else? I don't frigging know. I am just a botanist.
But what I want to say is, even if you savagely disagree about the correct way to do things, the correct way to fix the system--to make it so that people are getting what they deserve and no less, so that no one who wants to work is unemployed and no one who works goes without food, shelter, or education--you still want it. People who advocate "redistribution of wealth" probably don't actually want to take money from people who've earned it and given it to lazy bums. It's one thing to say "redistribution of wealth will result in money being taken from those who've earned it going into the pockets of lazy bums"--that may be accurate. But I think it is inaccurate to say "People who advocate redistribution of wealth WANT money to be taken from those who've earned it and be given to those who don't deserve it!!!!"
And if we all want the same thing, we should try to work together! We want the same thing, we just disagree about the means to get there. OK!?!?

OK, I am stepping off my soapbox now.

No comments: