"Classroom" Socialism Rebuttal
I have seen the "classroom" explaination of Socialism posted on Facebook and sent to me directly be email.
The summary of the story is that students are all given an average rating acording to how the class did as a whole--this is Socialism. The example contains false logic and does not represent Socialism or social programs.
First, the classroom grading system is a socialist system already. Every student can ONLY get 100% on any test or assignment, that is the normalizing factor, not the averaging of student's grades. Each student has the chance to get the highest score and no one is denied the equality of getting the highest grade.
In contrast to our society, the following grading system would be more appropriate. Twenty students have the ability to get 100% on each test. One student in the class has the ability, through consequence of birth or circumstance, to get up to 5000% on each test. Even a failing grade for this student, 2500%, is exsesively more than the top score for other students. Several students have the ability, through consequence of birth or circumstance, to only get 50% on each test and therefore fail every test even when they recieve a perfect score.
Second, the classroom example equates averaging grades with richness/fullness of life. To be truthful to what a social program is, Socialism gives everyone the chance to earn their grades (richenss/fullness of life). If a student has a debilitating illness and misses a test, the student may be given a chance to make up the test that was missed. The student is not penalized for having a disability and missing the test. The same way our society has always strived to help others where the need is greatest.
The original purpose of social programs was not to be free services for lazy people. Social programs were put inplace so that people who are in need of assistance can get back to a productive life. Social security was originally for our World War II veterans, but today it has been taken hostage by government and use poorly. Welfare is another hot topic and it has also been taken hostage and bastardized into a free "meal" ticket for many. I argue that social programs are valuable, and keep a society from decline as long as the system is not abused.
Lazy people are not part of a social society. The truth of that statement was much easier to see when the communities were small. The lazy person, in a small community, was helped only a few times before it became apparent that the person was either not productive or would not reciprocate assistance.
There are several social programs that we take for granted. The police, fire department, public schools, and others. These are social programs by definition--when their service is needed, the person in need does not pay them directly for their service, society does. Next time you call the police for any reason, realize that you did not pay the officer directly for this service. Would a plumber fix leaking pipes in a house without being paid by the homeowner? Public schools are the same story, I was never paid by a student's parents for my instruction.
The summary of the story is that students are all given an average rating acording to how the class did as a whole--this is Socialism. The example contains false logic and does not represent Socialism or social programs.
First, the classroom grading system is a socialist system already. Every student can ONLY get 100% on any test or assignment, that is the normalizing factor, not the averaging of student's grades. Each student has the chance to get the highest score and no one is denied the equality of getting the highest grade.
In contrast to our society, the following grading system would be more appropriate. Twenty students have the ability to get 100% on each test. One student in the class has the ability, through consequence of birth or circumstance, to get up to 5000% on each test. Even a failing grade for this student, 2500%, is exsesively more than the top score for other students. Several students have the ability, through consequence of birth or circumstance, to only get 50% on each test and therefore fail every test even when they recieve a perfect score.
Second, the classroom example equates averaging grades with richness/fullness of life. To be truthful to what a social program is, Socialism gives everyone the chance to earn their grades (richenss/fullness of life). If a student has a debilitating illness and misses a test, the student may be given a chance to make up the test that was missed. The student is not penalized for having a disability and missing the test. The same way our society has always strived to help others where the need is greatest.
The original purpose of social programs was not to be free services for lazy people. Social programs were put inplace so that people who are in need of assistance can get back to a productive life. Social security was originally for our World War II veterans, but today it has been taken hostage by government and use poorly. Welfare is another hot topic and it has also been taken hostage and bastardized into a free "meal" ticket for many. I argue that social programs are valuable, and keep a society from decline as long as the system is not abused.
Lazy people are not part of a social society. The truth of that statement was much easier to see when the communities were small. The lazy person, in a small community, was helped only a few times before it became apparent that the person was either not productive or would not reciprocate assistance.
There are several social programs that we take for granted. The police, fire department, public schools, and others. These are social programs by definition--when their service is needed, the person in need does not pay them directly for their service, society does. Next time you call the police for any reason, realize that you did not pay the officer directly for this service. Would a plumber fix leaking pipes in a house without being paid by the homeowner? Public schools are the same story, I was never paid by a student's parents for my instruction.