Showing posts with label equality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label equality. Show all posts

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Father-Daughter Talk

The following is a humorous little story that I read in a local newsletter,"The Chatterbox". This eloquent little story clearly exposes the folly of liberalism and the hypocrisy of what is being taught to our gullible youth on today's college campuses. I couldn't have put it better myself. This story was well written and made an excellent point.

Father Daughter Talk

A young woman was about to finish her last year of college. Like so many others her age she considered herself to be a very liberal Democrat and was for distribution of all wealth. She felt deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Libertarian, which she expressed openly.

One day she was challenging her father on his beliefs and his opposition to higher taxes on the rich & the addition of more government welfare programs. Based on the lectures that she had participated in and the occasional chat with a professor she felt that for years her father had obviously harbored an evil, even selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father.

He stopped her and asked her point blank, how she was doing in school. She answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain. That she studied all the time, never had time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend and didn't really have many college friends because of spending all her time studying. That she was taking a more difficult curriculum.
Her father listened and then asked, "How is your good friend Mary doing?" She replied, "Mary is barely getting by." She continued, "She barely has a 2.0 GPA," adding, "and all she takes are easy classes and she never studies. But Mary is so very popular on campus, college for her is a blast, she goes to all the parties all the time and very often doesn't even show up for classes because she is too hung over."

Her father then asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your 4.0 GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0." He continued, "That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA."

The daughter visibly shocked by her father's suggestion angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I worked really hard for mine, I did without and Mary has done little or nothing, she played while I worked real hard!"

The father slowly smiled, winked and said, "Welcome to the Libertarian Party!"

This story is just another example of how liberals call on the rest of us to follow their ideology. Often, they deem themselves exempt from their own rhetoric, because they consider themselves more compassionate and intelligent. In other words, they know what is best for the rest of us. Individual responsibility based on universal spiritual principles is the basis of conservatism. Equality of outcome is what liberals are always preaching, regardless of individual behavior. They are driven by emotions that make them feel like they are doing good, when in fact, the unintended consequences of their actions, often exacerbate to problems that they are attempting to solve. Examples are:

affirmative action in education and the workforce
Affirmative action, by definition, results in minorities that are less capable, competent and motivated than their peers in universities and the workplace. This may lead to animosity directed toward less qualified minorities from their peers who have sacrificed and struggled to get better grades and hone their skills. They are often left feeling embittered when they are passed up for college admittance and jobs due to affirmative action programs which place less qualified minorities in front of them. This will actually perpetuate the myth that minorities are not as intelligent or capable as their fellow students and co-workers. Minority students and workers who are placed in universities and jobs above their capabilities are more likely to fail. They themselves will be worse off in the long run because they are placed in schools and jobs that they do not have the necessary skills, abilities and motivation to be successful at. Affirmative action sets up the people who it is supposed to help, for failure.

tax the rich and give to the poor
This policy will discourage achievement, productivity and the creation of wealth. By over-taxing wealthy, successful people, they will be less motivated to risk their capitol through business investment. It also contributes to the spiritual degradation of the "poor".

Business investment is what creates jobs for the poor and middle class. If the profits are taxed away from the rich, they simply will not be motivated to invest and create jobs. Also, high taxes leave the rich with less money to spend on luxury items, like furs, yachts, mansions, private planes, etc. Entire industries will lose their customer base. This means that millions of small businesses, contractors and middle-class employees will lose their source of income that is derived from manufacturing and servicing these luxury items.

What liberals fail to see is that poor and middle class people have the ability and opportunity to move up the economic ladder when properly motivated by profits and the chance of becoming rich. By punishing the rich, you are actually reducing the "poor" and middle-class's chances of improving their lot in life and becoming the rich themselves. Most of today's millionaires are self-made men who have worked their way up from poor and middle class backgrounds. The US does not have a class system that is set in stone. People are constantly moving up and out of lower economic situations every day. Man's natural motivation to succeed works best when not deterred by taxes on the rich and government subsidies for the "poor".

Families, Churches, and private charities are best at helping the truly needy. When people give voluntarily, it improves their character as well as efficiently filling a need. It is better to give than receive. This is a universal spiritual principle that applies to voluntarily giving. Having your wealth seized by the government, for what politicians have convinced constituents are altruistic purposes, is of no spiritual benefit to anyone. Also, the government bureaucracies that are charged with helping the poor are inefficient at best and corrupt at worse. Voluntary charity is spiritually uplifting. Forced redistribution of wealth can have a corrupting effect on all who are involved.

When people are over taxed, they feel embittered, used and unmotivated. A few weeks ago, the Internal Revenue Service released data on tax year 2003. The data shows that the top 1 percent of taxpayers, ranked by adjusted gross income, paid 34.3 percent of all federal income taxes that year. The top 5 percent paid 54.4 percent, the top 10 percent paid 65.8 percent, and the top 25 percent paid 83.9 percent. The lower 50 percent of wage earners, paid only 3 percent of federal income taxes.

Politicians often pit one class against another in order to secure political power. They offer programs to "help" the "poor", but the "poor" often feel resentment because government assistance is never enough. Human nature is such, that getting something for nothing, breeds laziness, apathy and resentment. This results in a permanent underclass that remains dependent on inadequate government programs. They remain beholden to the politicians that dole out the freebies. As a result much of this underclass will become unmotivated to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps and remain in and endless cycle of poverty. An unmotivated underclass is a drain on our economy as well as spiritually degrading for the poor themselves.

Taxing the rich and subsidising the poor contributes to negative economic growth as well as a vicious cycle leading to spiritual depravity. Although many liberals have noble altruistic motives, the unintended consequences of their "feel good" solutions often exacerbate the problems they are trying to solve.

Thursday, July 10, 2008

Women In The Workplace

Today I heard an audio clip of Barack Obama who said this before a cheering crowd: “When women still make just 77 cents for every dollar men make - black and Latina women even less - that doesn't just hurt women, it hurts families who find themselves with less income, and have to work even harder just to get by.” That statement made me very angry because it is deceptive, disingenuous, and just plain wrong on many levels.

First off, I would like to know, why do liberals confuse level of income, with the level of meaning in their lives? Next, I would like to know, why do liberal crowds always cheer when they are told that America is an unfair, mean place? Also, why are liberals always trying to achieve equality of outcomes, regardless of peoples choices and behaviors? But most importantly, I would like to discuss why Obama's statement is deceptive and disingenuous.

Obama's statement is deceptive for several reasons. That particular statistic does not compare women who work at the same type of jobs as the men that they are compared with. When you compare equal jobs, the disparity shrinks. When you include equal experience, it shrinks even more. That statistic also does not compare women who work the same number of hours as men. When you compensate for hours worked, the disparity shrinks even more. On average, women work 200 hours less per year when compared with men.

Many would say, women are discriminated against and forced to take lower paid jobs, such as receptionist or waitress. They claim that discrimination keeps women from holding high paying jobs because of a glass ceiling. Fortunately, in the US we are still given a free choice of what occupations we choose to peruse and we are also free to choose among a variety hours and times required to work at various jobs. It just so happens that women on average, choose to work at jobs that do not require as many hours to be worked annually. It is very deceptive and disingenuous to leave this fact out when quoting that statistic, yet I hear liberals constantly using that statistic unchallenged.

Another thing that Obama conveniently left out of his comment was that women, have similar, if not better education than men. Nobody is denying the fact that women have equal or better opportunities and higher education than men on average. Currently women make up 55% of all college enrollments. However, often women have more education but less experience than the males at the same jobs.

On jobs that I have held, I have always noticed that when there is a job opening, the manager always has a hard time finding a good person to fill the slot. As an auto mechanic, I worked on commission. The manager is always looking for someone who can work fast and with a minimum of mistakes or accidents. He is looking for someone who can get the most work done. Most managers would be looking for these qualities. But in commission work, they want to find the person that will make the most money for himself, because that person will be earning the most money for the company and keeping its customers happy. Since the customer never sees the mechanic it doesn't matter what he/she looks like, what race they are, what sex they are or how good their communication skills are. The manager is desperately looking for someone who can fix cars right the first time, and get it done quickly and safely.

I have worked in many repair shops and auto dealerships, but I have never worked alongside a female mechanic. However, women did work as service-writers, cashiers, in the parts department, in office jobs, and even as service managers. Out of all those job categories, the mechanics usually earned the most money (save some service managers). Do you think that auto dealerships discriminated against women by not allowing them to work as mechanics? I do not. I think that very few women choose to do the dirty, sweaty work required as an auto mechanic. Also, I think as a whole, women's innate talents, and desires do not lie in this area. Of course there are exceptions. And I have heard stories about very competent and happy women mechanics, but on the whole, women are not auto-mechanics because they choose not to work as auto mechanics, not because they are being discriminated against or relegated to lower positions at the auto dealerships. The free market determines how much each job category will pay depending upon how much money qualified and trained people are willing to do the work for, and the amount of supply viruses demand in the employment market.

Is it possible that many women choose not to work as many hours as men because they would rather have more time to spend raising their children, or doing other things? I believe that most women have an innate tendency toward child rearing, while most men have an innate tendency to be more competitive in their career. Most divorcées, and family courts also believe in this these innate tendencies. In most divorce settlements, the woman is usually awarded custody of the children, because she fights for it, and the judge usually agrees with the woman when awarding child custody. I do not hear Obama and liberals complaining about this disparity, because women are making these choices. So why do I hear them complaining when women choose to work less hours or choose less competitive careers?

Personally I believe that families would be better off, if women did not work while there are young children in their homes. Families would surly be better off if there was a full time mother and wife in the home. But we live in a free country, where women and men are free to individually choose how they will live their lives. We are free to choose how we divide our time between work, family and leisure. In today's day and age, many women choose a full time career. But some women also choose to be full time “stay-at-home-moms”, and others choose flexible jobs that will allow them more time at home. On the other hand, a vast majority of men choose to be full time breadwinners. As a result of “women's right to choose”, women, on average choose to earn 77 cents for each dollar that a man earns on average. Women have different priorities than men. As a result, many are not tied to a restrictive career path, they are free to leave the work force for years at a time.

Often, many women have a desire to “have it all”, a family and a meaningful, rewarding career. Unfortunately, in real life, compromises often have to be made, sometimes at the expense of the family, and sometimes at the expense of the career. In any case, it is today's women who are making these choices, not a sexist society who is trying to keep women down. I do not believe that in today's day and age, women are being held down in the work place.

I do not understand why liberals politicians are constantly trying to deceive the public about this. Why are liberal constituents so eager to celebrate anything that advances the premise that America is a mean and unfair country? Why do so few conservatives have the courage to hold Barrack Obama, Hillary Clinton and other liberals, accountable for this disingenuous deception? I do not know the answer to these questions, but I do know that today's liberal culture prefers to believe in causes that makes them feel good, rather than perusing the truth. The biggest danger that America faces today, is putting emotion above reason and losing interest in the truth.