Socialism Experiment

Hi,

you do realize that this is just another urban ledgend and probably never happened?

http://www.snopes.com/college/exam/socialism.asp

regards,

Christine

Why would he even have to experiment? There were enough examples in Eastern Europe and Asia.

Oh I definitely want to see the link about that story.

Whether real or not, stuff like this deserves to be debunked.

It's interesting that we're given the impression that the have-nots who were undeservedly rewarded in this experiment didn't "study hard", and doesn't account for those that perhaps weren't as naturally equipped in this particular field of study, but in fact put forth as much effort as the class savants.

Granted, that's not that big of a deal in school, as we're all presented with a level playing field (more or less), and all the rules are laid out on the table beforehand. An "A" has the same weight, whether in Business Calculus or Wildlife Management. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses, and you eventually learn to play to your specialty. But that's not how the world works, is it. Sometimes you do everything right, and fate deals you an inexplicably terrible hand.

I would like to think that there are many people with altruistic leanings that find achievement and success in sharing their wealth with those that try just as hard in life, but aren't afforded the luxuries that capitalism provides those that happened to choose more marketable careers. But that's not what the "experiment" is reflecting, it merely divides the world in half, consisting of overachievers and underachievers, and prides itself in predicting the class warfare that ensues. It's a loaded, inaccurate assessment of natural demographics.

I'm not saying that socialism is a good or bad thing on the whole, just that the e-mail you received seems rather agenda-laden.

OK- so what is the point of this made up story? I'd be interested to hear your oppinion.

Do you think it tells us anything about socialism? About your society? About human nature? Or about Obama (who doesn't have anything to do with it at all as this hoax seems to be 15 years old)?

Do you think it is a realistic tale and that a whole class would not learn and subsequently end up with an F?

regards,

christine

Um,

that's not at all what keycubes was saying, I think you may have misunderstood her

All she said that it is harder for poor people to be able to afford to study and that rich people don't share enough of their wealth with poor people to enable them to study. That doesn't mean she said that poor people don't study.

Personally I agree with keycube: there are a lot of rich people out there who don't share their wealth by donating for good causes because they'd rather buy luxury items for themselves and their family.

She didn't say that poor students don't study or don't study hard, either.

regards,

christine

... I really appreciate the love my family gives me and I don't work hard for it- it comes naturally.


regards,

Christine

If a wealthy person doesn't want to donate their wealth to "good causes" then that is their prerogative. After all, it is their money, and their business in what they do with it.

I don't really think the "experiment" in the e-mail holds water at the college level, where students have access to the same educational resources at the school- libraries, computer labs, tutoring, etc. Students at this level also come from a wide variety of backgrounds besides economic status- age (traditional vs. nontraditional students), work experience, work ethic, family life, and study habits.

Over the last year I've ran into a lot of students who are just plain lazy. Look at some of the comments about professors on www.ratemyprofessor.com. "Homework?!? Quizes?!? This is supposed to be college, not high school!" Yeah, it's college it's supposed to require effort.

I work 40+ hours a week from 7pm to 3:30 am or 5 am. I'm certainly not wealthy as I sometimes find myself living paycheck to paycheck, but I'm able to consistently pull down "As" and the occasional "Bs" because I work my butt off.

I have more to add but I need to get my thoughts together first. Right now, I'm off to the library to research for my English Comp 3 essay so I can finish it by tomorrow night.

I did not misunderstand, nowhere did it say that the poor kids/students were the ones that did not study, Keycube assumed that, not me.


Um, and I was trying to tell you that Keycube didn't assume that, either


LOL, I wasn't talking about "love", to tell you the truth I think you missed the entire point of this thread.

[/quote]

That's why I'd asked you to explain it to me, but of course you don't have to.

regards,

Christine

[QUOTE from original post]
The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.[quote]

This is ALL that was said. Where the heck did "poor people" = the ones that didn't study, come from?

Keycube didn't say anythng about poor/disadvantaged people!

If anything, my take on the 'haves' and 'have nots' question would be; the 'haves who studied' and the others who 'have not studied'.

But then, that's just me, trying not to start arguments with everyone.

And the hint is in the first line. There's only been one semester (and not even a full one at that) since Obama took office.

Good story, and an excellent explanation of Economics 101, but it's been around quite a while.

It DOES tell us a lot about human (and animal) nature. We are motivated by various things, but when it comes to grades, we're motivated by achievement.

It's possible the class learned as much as ever, but not in the way to be able to pass a test on it, which is often determined by words, phrases, and concepts given out by the professor.

There are good reasons there are "Do not feed the animals" signs up in our national parks, too. Do you know why?

... well, I've seem to have missed that then. I still haven't understood if you think this made up story has anything to do with socialism, but then again maybe I don't have to.

If you think this tale is about working for rewards- what has Obama or socialism got to do with anything?

regards,

christine

Just to let you all know, Keycube is Male.

Good for him!

Sorry I got that one wrong and thanks for pointing it out.

christine

Very well illustrated by this teacher. I love it! And I agree.....

Not in the slightes though I must admit I'm rather curious as to why you are asking

I'm 35

By the way- you make it sound like socialism is about taking money away from hard working people. Is that how you see it?

regards,

Christine

Epic fail.

The only generalization made was by the author of the e-mail, who made the correlation between have-nots (those that didn't get good grades), and those that didn't "study hard". The e-mail itself makes the leap that those who are "disadvantaged" (not economically, but by not getting good grades), don't make an honest effort (it carefully specifies only two classes of students, those who try and those who don't). Those that do make an honest effort but fail to get good grades aren't accounted for in the experiment. Essentially, the experiment assumes a society with two contentious social classes at opposite ends of the economic (and ethical) spectrum. Not an accurate interpretation of society.

The economic status of the students of the experiment is a moot point. The experiment is merely a metaphor. I thought that was rather obvious.

In truth, what I proposed was exactly the opposite of what you manged to interpret of my post. I hope most people who read it understood that. I'm sorry that you did not, or perhaps merely chose not to, as far too often seems the case.

Oh God, you really think Obama is Socialist? Gee...
IMO, If this teacher also thinks so, he should not be teaching... He should go back to school himself!

I think it's totally wrong to try to compare poor people in this country to people in school who don't study as this experiment has done. Poor people DO work hard- the truth is we are not all the same, some people have access to more resources and it's something that they are born with- that gives them advantages and can become rich more easily than others- such as culture and social capital. Poor people cannot get those because they were not born with them, this restricts their access to the same resources, because a lot of times it's about who you know and how well you fit in. Oh gosh I am not going to go on a long rant here because it's pointless...I know those who believe poor people=lazy people won't change their minds.
And also, I believe that if the college students were socialized to believe that it is morally the right thing to do to, to accept an average score while getting a few points subtracted in favor of those with lower scores, they wouldn't have had a problem with it. It's all about one's personal beliefs and how society has taught him or her to act.
We cannot have utter and complete liberty of government control of the economy while we have such disparities in people's access to resources. It creates injustice, and injustice is much worse IMO. We have to compromise, there is no such thing as a completely just and free society at the same time.

EXACTLY this too! By the same token England and Germany should be like Eastern Europe and Asia used to be under Soviet control?? Is that how it is?? Because Obama hasn't come up with a plan that is any more radical than what those countries already have in place, plus in the English parliament the Labor party has the majority...

... interestingly socialism originally emphasized the need to transform the capitalist industrial society into a much more egalitarian system in which all of us would have access to equal resources thus eliminating the differences between the rich and poor.

Obviously neither capitalism nor socialism as a system seem to work.


regards,

christine