Email from the wings, again.

[madamesilverspurs]

Just got this from a winger family member who refuses to read anything political from me because I campaigned for Obama. I could swear I've seen this before, along with some snappy responses, but haven't been able to find it. Does it look familiar to anyone else? If not, how would you respond to it? (I'm giving myself 24 hours before responding, helps to keep peace in the family.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before,
but had once failed an entire class.



That class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.


The professor then said, "OK,
we will have an experiment in this class on Obama's plan".


All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.


After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B.
The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.


As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.
The second test average was a D!
No one was happy.


When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.

The scores never increased as bickering,
blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.


All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.


Could not be any simpler than that."

[Taverner]

1. This would be funny if it weren't straight out of Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged"

This is exactly what happens to a group of workers in one storyline in the "novel"

Unfortunately, its the CLASSIC Straw Man argument.

[madamesilverspurs]

6. Oh, wow.

Read that back in about '72 --


Thanks!

[BlooInBloo]

2. More RW shit on DU.

[gratuitous]

3. Long on polemic, short on specific

What college did this happen at? What was the professor's name? When did it happen?

Tell your winger family member that when he or she provides some specifics, you'll be happy to give a substantive response. However, until then, you will assume the story is a bogus bit of make-believe designed to bolster an argument that can't be made without resorting to fantasy, rendering it immediately false.

Because otherwise, there are plenty of real world examples where the few grabbed everything they could, impoverished the many, and ultimately ruined their society. And when the society fell, as it inevitably had to, the greedy didn't fare very well.

[madamesilverspurs]

7. thanks,

I did respond and expressed doubt that the story had any factual basis.

[gratuitous]

10. Glad to help

I'll bet the conversation, if it continues at all, goes in a different direction entirely.

[Betty Karlson]

4. Not supportive of socialism, myself, I still think...

... This professor should be fired for misrepresenting socialism.

Socialism is not 'equalizing everything to the point of no difference'.

A more viable comparison would have been to abolish all Fs and Es, and the As too to compensate for it. The result would have been:

Children who receive a D (adversary life circumstances in our analogy) do not fall back so much that they will never be able to make up for it again.

Children who receive a C can get by, but would still be encouraged to go for a better mark (That would be the middle incomes).

Chidren who get a B can be pleased with themselves, for their mediocracy is the best mark available (Hurray for upper middle class incomes)...

Which leaves the prodigies as the only ones to really have a grudge. (= The Rich)

Socialism would not reward outstanding students, and as such discourage them - as a result the learning progress of the class would be slowed down. (Hence my objections to socialism.) But the misrepresentation the professor made characterises him, to me, as an unprofessional man who had refused to learn to distinguish between socialism and anarchism (which, incidentally, is exactly what his experiment represented).

[madamesilverspurs]

8. Thanks,

your first sentence pretty much sums up my reaction. I've responded as thoroughly as I dare with this particular relative, but have alerted the rest of the family to prepare for an explosion, just in case. . .

[optimal-tomato]

5. Give him a counter "story".

An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he fails students all the time, but only those that don't work hard enough to earn the grades. At the beginning of class, he asks the students what their final grade was in the prerequisite to his more advanced class.

If a student had an A in that first class, they started the class with 1000 points.
If a student had a B in that first class, they started the class with 800 points.
If a student had a C in that first class, they started the class with 500 points.
If a student had a D in that first class, they started the class with 300 points.


The professor then explained, "As you take tests in this class, you may lose or gain points. Each test has 50 questions, and you must wager 50 points to take an exam. For each question you get right, you get 3 points. For each question you get wrong, you lose your wagered point. There are three tests. Good luck."

Six students met after the first class to discuss the rules.

Alice had gotten an A in the prerequisite, and was a hard worker and overachiever.
Byron had gotten an A in the prerequisite and was naturally gifted at taking tests.
Cassie had gotten an A in the prerequisite because she took an AP course in High School and it was much easier than a college course.
David had gotten a B in the prerequisite, and was a good student, but suffered from dyslexia.
Eddie had gotten a D in the prerequisite because he always overslept on test days.
Frank had gotten a D in the prerequisite because he frequently had to work instead of attend class.


The First Test Results:

Alice did poorly. Out of a maximum of 150 points, she only got 75. Alice: 1025
Byron did well. Out of a maximum of 150 points, he got 140. Byron: 1090
Cassie decided not to take the test. Cassie: 1000
David did very poorly because the professor used a hard-to-read font. Out of a maximum of 150 points, he got 10. David: 760
Eddie overslept. Eddie: 300
Frank did poorly. Out of a maximum of 150 points, he only got 50. Frank: 300

The Second Test Results:

Alice did very poorly because her mother got sick, so she didn't study. Out of a maximum of 150 points, she only got 15. Alice: 990
Byron did well. Out of a maximum of 150 points, he got 130. Byron: 1170
Cassie decided not to take the test. Cassie: 1000
David did somewhat better. Out of a maximum of 150 points, he got 65. David: 775
Eddie overslept. Eddie: 300
Frank did poorly. Out of a maximum of 150 points, he only got 55. Frank: 305

The Third Test Results:

Alice did very poorly because her mother died, so she didn't study very much. Out of a maximum of 150 points, she only got 25. Alice: 965
Byron decided not to take the test. Byron: 1170
Cassie decided not to take the test. Cassie: 1000
David studied very hard and did somewhat better. Out of a maximum of 150 points, he got 70. David: 795
Eddie overslept. Eddie: 300
Frank did poorly because he missed a few classes to work. Out of a maximum of 150 points, he only got 35. Frank: 290


After the three tests, the professor explains his final grading system.
A - 1000 or more
B - 800-999
C - 500-799
D - 300-499
F - 299 or less


Final Results

Alice, while starting out fairly solidly, had personal issues that brought her initial A to a B.
Byron did well in the first two tests, then decided to skip the third, easily overshooting the requirement for an A.
Cassie never took a single test, allowing her initial A to stand.
David struggled in every test, but still lost ground, bringing his B to a C.
Eddie never took a single test, allowing his initial D to stand.
Frank showed up as much as he could, but his job made attending classes difficult. He failed, calling only 10 points short of a D.


In the end, was this fair?
Cassie did far less work than Alice, David, or Frank, but ended with a better score than all of them.
Alice, David, and Frank ended up doing worse than their initial grade for a variety of reasons, but they were penalized for trying.
Even if Frank had aced every one of his tests, he could only ever acquire 600 points, meaning he could never have gotten better than a C, no matter how hard he worked.
On the other hand, if Cassie had taken every test and filled in complete nonsense, she could never have ended up with less than 850 points, or a B, no matter how poor a student she was.

You could further complicate this. Maybe the students could "purchase" special tutoring or bonus questions with their points, so that they could gain more points by using the points they have.

In the end, when people do not begin with a level playing field, then their own skill/effort is only one part of their success (and sometimes not a part at all). When some people begin with enough of an advantage, they can retain that advantage without any effort whatsoever.


Capitalism rewards capital. Not work. Not skill. On very rare occasion, someone breaks the mold and goes from rags to riches. But many more brilliant, hardworking people never achieve a higher station in life. On very rare occasion, a blithering idiot with a massive trust fund loses everything. But many more blithering idiots spend their family's money without ever working a day in their life.

But in the end, there is no need to make this an either-or. We can have a system that rewards hard work and brilliance while still providing a more even distribution of wealth. Start with a progressive capital gains tax, a reasonable estate tax, and programs that provide a level playing field for lower-income people and children (especially education). And while we're at it, we can make sure that if you work full-time in this country, you're not hopelessly stuck in poverty.

I guess I'd say something like that...

[madamesilverspurs]

9. Thanks for a very thoughtful response.

I'd dearly love to send it, but I needed to condense my response; this particular relative doesn't care for 'lenghty elitist rants', big surprise. As it is, the brief and rather tepid response I sent will likely get me demonized as a minion of the anti-Christ.

[elehhhhna]

11. BO only became Pres. 6 months ago. During what semester did this

stupid story allegedly occur? lol