On 2/21/2012 11:52 AM, George Plimpton wrote:

Everyone *does* have an equal opportunity to be rich.

Not if you figure in probability. Once you put that in you find that
only a select handful have the opportunity to be rich. If that isn't the
case then why is the number of rich so small?


Just like everyone has an equal opportunity to play in the NBA.

Yep. We don't all have an equal *likelihood* of playing in the NBA.

Good example of word play. You know what I meant.

Yes, I know that you are determined, one way or another, to say that the
system is "unfair".

I'm saying that a system that only gives a tiny few a fighting chance to
succeed and leaves out everyone else is not a fair system.


Sorry - it is *NOT* "unfair" that someone doesn't have the talent to
play pro basketball. It is *NOT* "unfair" that few people have the sort
of insight and personal drive that Bill Gates had. It's just life.

So it's not unfair that only a small group of people are born with the
talent, insight, or drive to succeed? Meaning that all the rest of the
people not endowed with those attributes can't be successful but that's
fair. You seem to think that just because something is a certain way
that makes it fair. But then you do not understand the meaning of fair.
You think it means as it is. But that isn't what it means. It means
people get equal treatment.



In other words if the
rich are rich because they earned the money and the poor are poor
because they prefered to not spend any time or effort in earning
money, then it is fair that some are rich and some poor.

That would be a much better argument, yes.

That *is* the argument.

I said "if" because

It *is* the argument.

When there are no other factors that would negate that argument.

It *is* the argument, Hawke-Ptooey.

Yeah, it is in your fantasy world where all it takes is hard work to
succeed. You would think a guy like you would have done the work to be
rich. Why didn't you? All it takes is effort. So what prevented you from
making the necessary effort to be successful? You just lazy?



But again, we know that it's
not just a matter of who puts out a good work effort and who didn't.

That's almost entirely the argument.

That's not the argument at all.

It is.

Not.

It is nearly entirely the argument, Hawke-Ptooey.

It would be if you were right but clearly you are not. Effort is the
least important element in being rich.


Because if it was then that would mean
Paris Hilton has put in far more work effort to earn money than you
have.

Nope. It means she has some innate market value that I don't have.


Wait a minute! You just said the argument was almost entirely about who
puts out a good work effort and who didn't?

You think there aren't a million pretty bimbos out there, Hawke-Ptooey?
There are, and Paris Hilton works harder than most of them.

We were talking about those with an innate market value and those
without one. Examples provided were you for having no innate market
value and Paris for having it. You were trying to weasel out again. The
fact remains that hard work is worthless in the face of other factors,
which Paris proves in spades. It is extremely common for people to make
lots of money while not working hard and plenty of people work their ass
off and get little for it. So effort only goes so far. If you expect to
make real success you need far more than effort. But I'm sure you can
find some lame excuse to claim that isn't true.

Hawke