Philosophy Now Forum

Good for them, just goes to show that Socialism can beat Capitalism at its own game, as does John Lewis.
Fair enough. How 'free' will you allow this enterprise to be? As the Capitalist, if possible, will make himself a monopoly. Do you think it should be bounded at all?
I wouldn't be surprised but given he 'taxed' a chunk of them over here by making his money running the pound I think it a strange way to help them.
I stand corrected. I assume you include the management in this.
Ah! Now this is a tricky one, as it is true but can they afford the time and money lost to get up to speed. Its not that easy to become educated when life's necessities are pressing upon one and over here there has been a major cut-back in adult educational facilities and faculties.

Not to mention that learning to rise above one's position in life does nothing to solve the problem of poverty, as the jobs which provided the "slave" wages will always be there even if one worker rises above another one HAS to take his place. It doesn't matter if you remove one individual if you have to replace him with another individual...it is still one person who isn't making enough money to live. It is absurd.

Actually...that type of sentiment always reminds me of when my youngest was a toddler. It was Easter and I set him on the grass with an egg carton which usually held a dozen eggs ...only I had 1 extra egg sitting on top of the dozen which I was about to hide the 13 eggs....I stepped away for a moment and when I turned around I saw that he had picked up an egg from the carton and put the extra egg in the empty slot....then he looked as the hand holding the superfluous egg with a confused stare and reached down and removed another egg from the carton...this time replacing it with the egg he had just taken out....he kept doing this for a while...all the time looking perplexed how come he always had an egg in his hand. No matter how hard he tried to find a slot for each egg...each time he was left with one egg too many. LOL It was adorable...as he was only 2 or 3.

It's not so adorable, however when adults make the same mistake...that is can't understand why even if one poor person escapes his lot in life...there will always be another to replace them. As those jobs will always need to be done and it is the base salary that is the problem and NOT the worker's laziness as to why they are in poverty. The way it is set up there is no solution to the problem, because there is no possibility of an empty slot in the position itself.

Bob,

I would be interested in your opinion on Professor Sandel's thesis. http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/ma ... ues-bodies

Tom

First of all, just the fact that he's from Harvard puts him in the batter's box with two strikes against him. Free-market capitalism is the only proper political economic system. It is never proper for the government to take money from one person and give it to another. If, however, for example, a social decision is made to assure that everybobody has medical care, then everybody should receive that financial benefit, both rich and poor. The question is where does the government get the money to pay for it. The only proper form of taxation is a single tax on property, property being defined as anything with intrinsic market value. All other forms of taxation are improper, and this includes income taxes, sales taxes, legal fines or confiscation of property.