One Solution to Social Inequality

Hi AH,

'The problem is that not everyone is permanently stuck at the bottom rung of life's job.'

The flip side of your statement is that many people spend their lives on the bottom rung. There are lots of examples of why this is so:

• Some people are profoundly retarded. Many others are less so, but still slow enough that they might be a hazard around power tools and heavy equipment.
• Some people are mentally ill.
• Some people are lazy.
• Some people have criminal records.
  
• Some people are born into sexist, racist or stratified societies.
• Some people live in societies where agriculture is mechanized, and where most of the manufacturing jobs have disappeared.
  

'Everyone should have the opportunity to be part of the service class so that they may be humbled enough that when they rise up above that...'

In 'Lake Woebegone' where everybody is above average this is true. On my planet approximately 49.999999999% of people are below average, some of them way below.

So your argument would suggest that we don't need to worry about how crappy these jobs are, how poorly they pay, or whether they are eliminated by automation, because they are just a form of 'hazing' we all go through before moving up the economic ladder. Is it possible that there is another side to this argument?

Greetings!

So, when you quoted me as saying, "'Everyone should have the opportunity to be part of the service class so that they may be humbled enough that when they rise up above that...'

You replied. "In 'Lake Woebegone' where everybody is above average this is true. On my planet approximately 49.999999999% of people are below average, some of them way below."

Are you disagreeing with my point that I think everyone should have the opportunity to be part of the service class, at least temporarily?

Not everyone can be a neurologist. Even those that can do not always choose to be one. There will always be poor, sadly. However, having the opportunity to rise above that is something that I think all societies should have. Your nation provides that opportunity and the USA is probably one of the best environments to do that in.

The proof of that lies in the numbers of immigrants we get (both legal and illegal). Statistically, those of lower social standing that immigrate here do better than those of lower standing that were born here with families that have roots here for generations.

That tells me that there is a gap between the two examples and it has less to do with the opportunities the environment offers than it does with social attitudes.

That gap bothers me (and many other people, too) because it can't be legislated away (although many politicians argue otherwise). The only way to close that gap, in my humble opinion, is to change ones' attitude, but people tend to get apathetic and forget how good they have it. Well, that one reason. Another reason is a poor choice of social role models some groups choose. Maybe a trip to Sudan or some other struggling country for a month or two might help realign some of those attitudes, but the social journey upward begins between one's ears.

It seems that everyone looks for someone that they can feel that they are better than. I call this the ha - ha factor.

Ha - Ha - I am richer than you, I make more money than you, my dad can beat yours up, I'm better looking than you, I have a better sex life than you, the list can go on and on.

People are not born equal and do not have the same chances to succeed, they don't meet the right people that could/would give them a chance to do better, they are around people that try to keep them from succeeding, some are more articulate some are not. They don't or are not able to finish high-school, don't get a chance to go to college, and are too busy trying to get by on minimum wages to spend time trying to get a self-taught education. They are different color, different religion, different language, all these and many more make classes of people.

If a pretty girl/women is kidnapped the media goes on and on, but it the person is not good looking or is just plain ugly, why it hardly make the news.

If California has a big fire,you hear about the $500,000 home with no insurance burning, but what about the poor guy that lives down the road, barely able to make his payments on his/her/their $30,000 house trailer. Who hears or cares about him?

The truth is that every person you meet makes some difference in how you feel about yourself, good, bad, repressed good looking, smart, or stupid.

Each individual reacts different to the same stimuli, have different standards for success, different intelligence, different abilities, different personalities.

All deserve respect, and encouragement. but in the end there will be classes, either perceived or real.

"you hear about the $500,000 home with no insurance burning, but what about the poor guy that lives down the road?"

Last time I saw property values in California, $500,000 homes were the poor guys down the road.

"All deserve respect, and encouragement. but in the end there will be classes, either perceived or real."

Absolutely! Well, respect is earned, but let's give the benefit of the doubt for this example anyway. However, there is only so many resources available to help people move up the ladder. It's like Harvard. You have to prove you are serious and talented enough to be accepted. Then again, the same thing applies to the State penitentiary. They usually don't throw you in jail on the first offense. They want to see if you are serious first.

All joking aside, I have met all kinds of people in my life. I have found that he most successful are the most generous people. The caveat is that they have to have a sense that any investment they make in "you" is going to pay off. Their time is valuable and they will not waste it. Real leaders like that do not play the snob-envy game you cite. I see enough of that, but most are the wannabes. Real leaders are just that; leaders. Leaders cultivate from the lower ranks and help them grow into leaders. Contrary to what everyone hears, there are a lot of vacancies at the top (i.e., it's not a zero-sum game).

One of the problems I see is that there a number of people that whine and moan about their situational injustice. "Where is my pie?" Yet, what little money they earn they immediately waste on frivolous things like 24" chrome wheels, jewelry, and bling. Their bank accounts are flat. The lottery is their retirement plan. They are never willing to invest their own paycheck back into themselves, just feed their ego and their desires. They live beyond their means, paycheck to paycheck (if the get one), and would rather party than educate themselves. Why should I (or anyone else) lift a finger for these people? Why should public money (your tax dollars) feed these fools?

This is where social engineering steps in and almost always makes a bigger mess than when first enacted. I know people's hearts are in the right place, but it is an absolute waste to try to change people that are unwilling to change themselves.

There will always be those that can't make it in life. Many are struck down by no fault of their own. However, may more live the way they do by choice. It's an attitude problem and I will not go into it in depth here because it will undoubtably offend people.

It is enough to say that the number of people that are really searching for help and are willing to work for success if given a chance, outnumbers the available resources (angels). While I am not necessarily a religious person, the saying God helps those who help themselves is spot on in this topic. I will always help those who are willing to help themselves. The rest are beyond my control.

For those bleeding hearts out there, if that seems cruel, spend a day out in the wilderness and look carefully. You will see nature takes no prisoners. Nature has no welfare program and humanity will look like saints, albeit a bit misguided.

I could not agree with you more. Take for example where you are born. Are the people around you ignorant or intelligent, you have a perception of how you should behave, if anything just to conform to your environment. I know this is an oversimplification of what you just stated, but it bears merit.

Long time,

You bring up a lot of interesting points. I particularly like the one about the 'immigrants we get (both legal and illegal)...of lower social standing that immigrate here' and then out perform the locals. To me it seems useful to consider the different filters these two groups have gone through.

As you rightly point out, it is much easier for a person with talent to get ahead in the USA than in almost any other country. It has been that way for many, many generations, unless of course you happen to have been born with dark skin or lady parts. For them it has only been that way for maybe a couple of generations. The opportunity to get ahead is as you say one of the main reasons why people from other countries want to move here.

This has two important implications:

• In the US there has been a sorting out of people, based on how much of 'the right stuff' they have. Two hundred years ago it was common for people with a lot of brains and ambition to come from humble beginnings, stuck in menial work far below their ability level. Nor was is at all unusual for these 'diamonds-in-the-rough' to find or create an opportunity to advance themselves. So they left Podunk, moved to the city, made some money and entered the middle class, married a nice smart middle class girl, and had a bunch of (mostly smart) middle class kids. Some of these kids grew up and went to college, found a nice college educated mate, and so on. Meanwhile back in Podunk, with each new generation, many of the smartest kids kept moving away to find a better life. Those who stayed behind married and had a bunch of kids, but (assuming that many of the qualities that make up 'the right stuff' are inherited, either biologically or culturally) the chances of these kids also being 'diamonds' are reduced. So in a sense we have a separation into different 'breeding populations': Podunkites tend to marry Podunkites, smart ambitious city folks marry other smart city folk, and of course the rich marry anyone they want but tend to marry other rich folks. So what we end up with after several generations is a meritocracy (with an overlay of inherited wealth), an incomplete and imperfect one, but probably as close as the world has ever come to one. There are many great things about a meritocracy when compared to say feudalism, but there are downsides, and this sorting out process is one of them.The sad truth is that to a large extent the Podunkites (who have by now also moved to the cities in large numbers with the mechanization of agriculture) have found their level. Precious few of them will grow up to be neurosurgeons.
• Many other parts of the world have societies that are closer to feudalism than to meritocracy, so it is not at all unusual for people with 'the right stuff' to be born there into humble (and even dire) circumstance. I think that what we see in the stream of immigrants arriving here is a mixture of these desperately poor but very able people, and their better educated fellows who are stiffled by the backwardness of their home country.

Statistically speaking, these two groups (immigrants and natives of lower standing) are quite different, both in terms of ability and motivation. It is therefore not really surprising that the newcomers out-compete the natives. I understand that this is an oversimplified explanation, but it is almost impossible to discuss the affairs of large groups of people without cutting corners.

So where am I going with this? My view is that none of us gets to pick our parents. What we accomplish in life is due to a combination of factors: the hand we are dealt by the accident of our birth, and how hard we are willing to work. There is pretty strong empirical evidence that smart people usually have smart parents. Ambition and a taste for hard work is not as clearly inherited, but the values we learn from our family are a big factor. I also worked a string of lousy jobs: washing dishes, waiting tables, flipping burgers, working on an assembly line, unloading fishing boats, etc., and as you say it teaches humility and self control. But part of the lesson learned is the 'there but for fortune...' awareness. And part of that lesson is that we learn not to pat ourselves on the back to hard or to often for the rewards our inherited gifts and our hard work have brought us. And a part of that lesson is that those menial jobs that were for some of us just a necessary part of a learning process, are for many others (including our aunts, uncles and cousins who stayed behind in 'Podunk') a life's work. The poverty and humble status that you and I had to endure for a while on our road to better things is all they may ever know. For the millions of unfortunate people the poverty and humilliation are not motivators, they are just insult added to injury. It is wise and good to be gracious in victory, especially toward your opponents who never really had a chance.

John

Well written, my friend.

This isn't a solution to social inequality, it's another status symbol; "oh the X-45's are so last year, and anyway we have ours upgraded every 3 months - why, you ask? How else would we display our wealth?"

Social inequality is reinforced at every level but particularly by the media. This is a solution for a staff shortage.

Yeah but I see it in human service as well, at least here in Asia. "Oh you have an Indonesian maid, that is so last year. We upgraded to a Filippino." And everyone thinks we are crazy because we have no maid at all...

Stop separating the classes and blaming other people for the situation they are in.

Or politicians remarking I feel your pain, And I am going to make it right by leveling the playing field by taking away from the rich and giving it to the poor.

If your health is good, then you work and earn you way out of your social inequality troubles. and stop comparing yourself to the lucky few who happened to be in the right place at the right time that appears to have had an easy ride.

And not standing there complaining expecting a free hand out

Replacing people with service robots will actually INCREASE inequalities, because such will eliminate a many lower-skilled positions on which the economically-challenged rely for sustenance and resources for improving their station in life. In stead of having a poor working class, one winds up with a poor unemployed class...

I am not a regular on this site but really enjoy the great information that is available. As I read these comments about social inequity I must say I saw the 21 year old kid next door this morning headed off for WORK. He has been unemployed for about a year now. He finally found a job at U-haul. Mom & Dad have been helping him out BUT..making him WORK his way out of his situation with WORK around the house, daily chores, and mom had a couple of surgery's that he helped cook...etc..I remarked just this morning that his truck is now clean and his is feeling good about himself again after about three weeks. God Bless Him and his family for sticking with it.

I was raised in NE. where if you didn't have a job or was lazy you were looked down on as a "never sweat". I have to praise the people who write in and are talking about different levels of lifes eniquities. THANK YOU I NEEDED THOSE COMMENTS TODAY.

Our politicians are trying to recreate a country that has supported the rest of the world by our hard work and helped poor and undeveloped countries that have been dominated by the tyranny imposed by their own governments. The real workers of this country are starting to talk about violent uprisings against this type of tyranny and excessive taxation to eliminate our middle class.

My wife and I pray everyday for direction. We can only imagine the worries of the unemployed loosing their homes and wondering how to put food on the table for thier familes. People who helped build this country from the bottom up. I am 53 years old an I am struggling to pay my taxes, house payments and keep food on the table.

I know this is not the site to talk about things like this but as I dream about plumbing in some solar panels to heat the floor in my little house. I think of this site and the endless amout of engineers and free resources available to me. I love America and the freedoms we still have.

You can try and put us down BUT....WORKING for our dreams feels GOOD and you can't take dreams or ideas away from anyone and I THANK this site. Please keep bringing us all hope, dreams and more ideas for tomorrow.

God Bless.

ps. Robots don't dream.

An answer that embraces the real question ! GA. milo

Isn't the financial system that creates the inequality? Robots are just extensions of human capabilities, after all. One man is capable to do a 100 men job by simply constructing a robot, a machine.

In the end is all about resources. The scarcity of the resources puts a price on them, and only the few can have them. The inequality is in the perpetuation of this system of debt, the economic slavery.

No one wants to work, just that some like to create. We work because we have to. It is the way we get every resource necesary for living, in this economic system.

Where is the evolution of society. I can not see anything of this sort. Up to now there is no evolution. It is true that the power is in the hands of many, but we can't see that. Robotics and automation are barely in infancy. man is capable of producing whatever society needs only with machines. No worker needed. So in the end why ask a price for something? Can't you just live your life? We were taught this is what people have to do, just work to live. It is absolutely wrong.

Social classes are related to this financial system- the economic slavery.A question would NOT be whether service robots are good in the society, but who they work for?

If they work for everyone that is ok. If they work for some people that put a price on the work of the robot, and ask others to pay, that is inequality.

In the end people in the "poor working class" and even "unemployed class" can still live their lives, grow their children, open their minds for anything else but "work".

Very well put!

Maybe I didn't express correctly the idea. And I apologise for it.

What you reffer to as "work" i reffered to as "create".

It is not about not wanting to do anything and it's not about me. It is about those who strugle to live their lives from one day to another, better said - to survive- in this social system. For them "work" has another meaning. I'm talking about this part of the society because there are many epople in this situation. There are dangerous jobs, monotonous jobs that no one wants to do them, just that some have to for that miserable salary that allows them to get the food.

Do you think that if they have a chance they would not write, or read, or paint, or fly? Surely they would like to do something totally different.

Over the subject of working, I like gardening. Because it is not too large, about 150 square meters, machines are not needed. I simply do some physical work and take care of it by hand.

What i want is to compare my activity with what farmers do. And I mean people that work the fields for a living. They surely do need machines. What about robotics? Well, it's about the same thing. And it is all the root of human ingenuity, the human vision. If we want to feed more people we build machines. If we want more time for ourselves we build machines, robots,for every service.

Of course this contradicts the monetary system in wich you have to do something to get paid, and then pay your taxes and credits a.s.o. To build something you need resources, you don't need money. Try to build a car without iron or plastic or any other resource but money. You can not. One might say that resource cost. Well is a man digs the iron yes. If a machine digs it, just in a monetary sistem one pays for it.

Simply put robots free people. They are just extensions of what we can do. If we want to create with tem we can, if we want to destroy the world with tem we can. It is up to us to decide. And I mean us the people, not the government or banks or any other establishment.

We have so much information and knowlege of everything and from this point of view our social system, out way of thinking is still in the s"tone age".

If I could get everything I need without the need to work, I would still work, and create, and invent, for everyone to benefit from it. We are unique and in the same time we are the same.

Everyone is not able to do the same job. Eliminating manual jobs would just starve more people, leave them with out a job and no way to get one - robots will not relieve the poorer working class it will just make them even poorer! And yes there are classes in in the USA just go to the northern part of Virginia and see whoo kissis up - you will see class at its 'best 'worste'! A level 23 will not invite a level 10 to a party nor will it be expected.

www.thevenusproject.com

another vision of the society;

Social inequality will always be a dialectic struggle for those who don't want to work and rise up above their position in life, we face that today in this country with the political parties ensconced in the White House. They believe in a society where the people who have risen up through the ranks and done well for themselves should give more back to "big government" and for them in turn to give it to those who don't want to struggle to the top like the rest of us. I worked my way through life, from working on ranches, busing tables to working offshore on oil rigs and paid my own way through college, with a family in tow so don't tell me about social inequality we, for the most part start at the bottom in life. For those that are children and the elderly we take care of as a nation, because they are our future and our past and too young or too old too take care of themselves. I am by no means wealthy, but I got here out of passion for life and lifes' little riddles. I do believe though, that women still make 20% to 25% less than men, doing the same job. That is social inequality in our country.

GA

social inequality is perinneal. people want to be comfortable and if possible gratify themselves. food, sex, ego boosting, indulge in mind altering pleasure using drugs and alcohol,and covet things. even the pursuit of knowledge stimulates most people to trample or use others so that they could be called intellectuals.Peoples' lives are influenced by circumstances. Policy makers can do as much helping people meet their basic needs. Attitude and values are governed by many factors. Bright people therefore should preach the virtue of moderation and contemplation just like what aristotle taught. Life would be a wild boar chase if contentment and moderation is not practiced by an individual.

When you say policy makers can "help" meet their peoples basic needs. What policy makers and what policies are you referring too and who is paying for these basic "needs".

In the U.S. we practice contentment and moderation how we see fit as law abiding citizens.

As far as the pursuit of knowledge I am not sure one could make a blanket statement that the pursuit of knowledge leads to people trampling over others in their pursuit of knowledge, I never ran across that, if anything many pursuits of knowledge are colaborative. If you have information to support that claim, "the pursuit of knowledge stimulates most people to trample or use others" I am interested.