Socialism.

An economics professor at Texas Tech said he had never failed a single student before but had, once, failed an entire class.

This particular class had insisted that socialism really worked: no one would be poor and no one would be rich, everything would be equal and ??????fair??????. The professor then said ??????Okay, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism. Instead of money, we??????ll use your grades.??????

All grades were to be averaged and thus would be ??????fair??????. This meant that everyone would receive the same grade, which meant that no one would fail. It also meant, of course, that no one would receive an A??????

After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who had studied hard were upset, but the students who had goofed off were quite happy with the outcome.

As the second test rolled around, the slackers studied even less now - they knew they??????d get a good grade anyhow. Those who??????d studied hard in the beginning now decided they wanted a free ride too. Thus, going against their own inclinations, they copied the slackers?????? habits. As a result, the second test average was a D.

No one was happy.

By the time the third test had been graded, the average was an F.

The scores never increased but bickering, blame, and name calling began to be the environment in which this class operated. It had been their own quest for ??????fairness?????? which had led to this unintended result of hard feelings and grievances. In the end, no one was willing to study just for the benefit of everyone else. Therefore, all the students failed??????to their great surprise.

The professor explained that their experiment with socialism failed because it was based on the least effort by all. Laziness and resentment were the outcome. There would always be failure in the situation they??????d agreed to in the beginning.

??????When the reward is great??????, he said, ??????the effort to succeed is great, at least for some. But when government takes all the reward away by taking from some without their consent and giving to others without their effort, then failure is inevitable??????.
_____________________________________________
Just an interesting find.
Got that from an email.
Fixed

[jayman]

you sure did .. i dont like spam in my inbox and i'm pretty sure it's not appreciated here ..

[Oscar]

What's the point of this post?

That's a worthless story. Just go away.

[jayman]

Originally posted by griffonluv

That's a worthless story. Just go away.

actuallyi feel as if it's a wonderful analogy.. in fact PERFECT but that isnt the point .. it's pure usda choice spam ..

What makes a post spam in the off-topic board? Just curious.

How is this pointless? You're all lemmings. The first replier said something about it being spam, then the rest did the same.

I don't see this as pointless at all. This is an excellent experiment and I'm very happy to see that one professor has the right idea.

This will be our nation. Four years. Too bad.

I think its called spam because its something that circulated email chain mails for awhile now.

Maybe he just wanted to share the story with people, I thought it was pretty interesting.

I'm sick and tired of all you Socialism bashers.

Lets try an experiment where the class is a complete free market.

It would be up to every individual to get whatever grade they wanted. Don't forget who gives the grades. Mr. Professor. He can pass or fail whoever he likes and for whatever reason he wants. Billy over there is a lazy student, but his parents require him to get good grades. His parents also have quite a bit of money, as Mr. Professor knows.

So one day after class Mr. Professor pulls Billy off to the side. "Billy your grades aren't looking very good this semester, I know your parents would be disappointed"

"I know Mr. Professor. I'm trying my hardest, but it seems I just don't understand your class. I would like to offer you a "token of appreciation" for attempting to teach me though"

"Why thank you Billy, I sure do appreciate it. Lets keep this our little secret though. You wouldn't want your grades falling later now would you?"

"No of course not Mr. Professor. Have a good evening."

As the semester goes on, the other students start realize that Billy has secretly been giving Mr. Professor "gifts". Jean is a good student, but her grades start to fall lower and lower for no apparent reason, so she talks to the professor after class.

"Mr. Professor, I noticed my grades have been falling. Can you explain why?"

"Well Jean it seems your work isn't the quality it used to be."

"I'm disappointed to hear that. I know you're a busy man, but do you think you could look over my paper again? Here's a "token of appreciation" for your time."

"I think I might be able to do that. I must be going though. See you next class."

At the end of the semester a few well off students have caught on to Mr. Professor's ways and have a satisfying A in the class. This leaves the intelligent students with little money upset that a select few have A's while the rest are stuck with C's because they have nothing to offer their professor.

Point being, It's obvious that complete socialism fails. Miserably. We have witnessed it in countries like the USSR and North Korea. On the other hand, we have also witnessed the failure of capitalism. That's right. Right here at home. Had socialistic practices not been put into place, we would be trying to feed our families with diseased "beef" with riddled rat poison, flies, and feces (as described in 'The Jungle' by Upton Sinclair), sending our 10 year old children to work 12 hour shifts with one break in 100* textile mills for pennies on hour, and polluting our environment while a few guys got to sit on $900 Billion getting anything their money could buy.

Complete socialism does not work. Complete capitalism does not work.

That being said, America will NOT become completely Socialist, and anyone who thinks that is ignorant.

Huh? Nice super stretch of the imagination there man. I have been eating the same beef, never gotten sick. I dont know of any sweat shops in the US and seriously doubt we will ever again. You cant even spank a kid and not get busted, let alone subject them to that.

Neither is a perfect system but your version of capitalism is definitly stretched.

Scocialism.

Yeah there are no sweatshops and bad meat because of government regulation of business originating in the Progressive era, which is around the presidency of Teddy Roosevelt and Wilson.

See - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_Food_and_Drug_Act
See - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muckraker

Everyone in this thread is talking about "socialism" which means they are all wrong...hmmm... Scocialism =...Rule by Nova Scotia?

Socialists as described by the intelligent people at ED.

Thats a joke of a website.

No it's not...

Originally posted by Real

Huh? Nice super stretch of the imagination there man. I have been eating the same beef, never gotten sick. I dont know of any sweat shops in the US and seriously doubt we will ever again. You cant even spank a kid and not get busted, let alone subject them to that.

Neither is a perfect system but your version of capitalism is definitly stretched.

I know you're a smart guy Real, but that was no stretch of the imagination. I suggest you take a look at the history of your own country. I described what America was in the late 19th to early 20th century.

The point I was making is that, that is what America was before socialistic practices were put into place. When people controlled the businesses alone, they did whatever they want. The Chicago meat packing industry is a famous example of why socialist practices are necessary for the benefit of the people. Without any government control, the meat packaging plant owners ordered the workers to use tainted meat, and did not regulate conditions in which the meat were kept. Thus leading to meat being stored in rooms that were infested with rats, and thus rat poison was thrown in the mix to kill the rats, with no care taken to keep the poison away from the meats. Then the companies would put dangerous flavor enhancing chemicals in meat to sell it at a higher cost, and a supposed higher quality.

That is just one example of the ways businesses are run when the government has nothing to do with them. In order to combat this, as mentioned, the socialistic(i.e. government regulating business) Pure Food and Drug act required inspectors to make sure meat was being handled properly for the people.

I don't know about you, but when I go to the store I like seeing that the steak I buy is certified by the USDA.


Edit:
Furthermore I will maintain that my representation of capitalism is NOT stretched. Read a history book. Specifically the chapter on the Industrial Revolution. When the majority of Americans worked long days with little breaks at meager pay, a select few did little to nothing because they could pay off whoever challenged them.

Too much capitalism = widespread corruption.

I have. Was one of my favourite parts of my high school education.

However, the very essence of capitalism is essential for any economy or government. I still believe you are stretching this by basing it off of a couple instances where a few ruined it for the masses. I would doubt that the entire gamit of meat packers were all following the same practices. A select, large few were.

I would argue that the Goverment, while not a "private" organization suffers from the EXACT same problems. You scratch my back, Ill ignore said issue. Having Government regulations (aka, socialistic) is really just using a governing body to enact rules to keep the whack jobs in line.

However, those same Government Regulations always have loop holes which are DESIGNED (or ignored) because somewhere, someone is getting a kick back.


Government always seems to end up running like a private sector ANYWAYS.

So whats the difference if a Goverment body sets up the ruling OR, another (or group of) private investors/ruling body set the rules?


Capitalism, too much, too little or just right = widespread corruption just like Government, too much, too little or just right = widespread corruption.

[doc28if]

That was really great.

Originally posted by Real

I have. Was one of my favourite parts of my high school education.

However, the very essence of capitalism is essential for any economy or government. I still believe you are stretching this by basing it off of a couple instances where a few ruined it for the masses. I would doubt that the entire gamit of meat packers were all following the same practices. A select, large few were.

I would argue that the Goverment, while not a "private" organization suffers from the EXACT same problems. You scratch my back, Ill ignore said issue. Having Government regulations (aka, socialistic) is really just using a governing body to enact rules to keep the whack jobs in line.

However, those same Government Regulations always have loop holes which are DESIGNED (or ignored) because somewhere, someone is getting a kick back.


Government always seems to end up running like a private sector ANYWAYS.

So whats the difference if a Goverment body sets up the ruling OR, another (or group of) private investors/ruling body set the rules?


Capitalism, too much, too little or just right = widespread corruption just like Government, too much, too little or just right = widespread corruption.

Yes I quite agree with you. The point that I was trying to make is that a complete socialist economy, as described in the first post, does not work. Just like a complete capitalist economy doesn't work either. There's a fine line in the middle, and Liberals and Conservatives seem to disagree where that line is. That's where the issue is. And it just pisses me off that as soon as a president wants to put a few socialist practices into action, the whole conservative front accuses him of turning America socialist, which it will never be.

As described in the first situation, Socialism looks great on paper, unfortunately it doesn't work in practice, just like extremes of any belief fail miserably.

Does anyone realize the topic is called "Scocialism?" [lol][lol]

NOW he edited it!!

I'm very upset. I came in here wanting to read about Scocialism and all I was got was this socialism and capitalism crap.


BOO!

I've always wanted to have a fight with Real consisting of essay-length posts [:(] I'm jealousss.

Pick me next.