Culture Lab wrote:
>> Why turn the spotlight on to those people?
>
Because they run the world and because, in their case, the disproportion
is clearly obvious. A case might be made for someone being twice a smart
as someone else or twice as hard working. But when the factor becomes
1,000,000, it's clearly hogwash.
>> How about anyone earning an income in, say, the top 40%. You know the
>> sales reps at SUN, the programmers, the tech writers, etc. The day
>> leftists can turn the spotlight on the fact that they didn't do
>> anything special to put them in their income bracket other than to be
>> born into the right family, at the right time, in the right place is
>> the day we make progress. Turning to a poor person and telling them
>> to stop blaming themselves for their station in life is only half the
>> equation. Social structure effects the winners as well as the also-rans.
>
My basic position on remuneration is that an hour of my time is worth an
hour of your time. Period. This might lead to some inequities, but these
pale in comparison to what's going on right now. I have no quarrel with
anything you say above: Where you end up has a lot to do with where you
start.
I asked you not to blame yourself because when you blame yourself you're making a parallel claim to control. You're saying "I could have done something to affect the outcome. But in your case, I don't think that's true. You were dealing with crooks and cowards, that's all. The only solution is to get away from them once you're discovered their real nature.
Joanna