Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Opinion.

Today, we spent the whole class time , discussing Socrates.  Socrates is Mr. Schick's favorite person, apparently. The whole three mods we discussed him. We found an important quotation,  " An unexamined life is not worth living," that Socrates said. We have three more philosophers to go over. Towards the end of the class, we started discussing a current issue that is an example of what kind of stuff Socrates thought about. We discussed how it is not the right thing, for rich people two not give any of their money to poor; but it also is not the right thing to just take their money, it's unconstitutional. We live in America, and if you want to be filthy rich, you have the freedom. If you want to not give any of your money to the poor, as bad and selfish as it is, you can, it's your American freedom. 
             If someone gives their money to someone in need,  it is charity. It is a freedom that we have, the freedom of charity. If the government just takes your money, they take your freedom of charity. Forced charity is not charity, it is socialism.   
             That is my view, and I welcome yours. Comment!

1 comment:

  1. Forced charity? Nice, Thomas. Some strong points. And socialism, that's exactly the word I thought of when you talked about capping the amount of money the rich can receive. That is restrictice of how people can succeed at life, giving no incentive to go further or be better, and at that point, no motivation to continue striving for success. At that point, limiting the amount of money people can make, you might as well limit what people can eat, too, because the rich can eat filet mignon while the poor get stuck at Taco Bell. And to take that further, the rich might get more condiments and variety. Well that's not equal. Okay, so now everyone gets the same exact plain taco to eat. All's fair, right? I realize this is an extreme example, but im limiting how successful a person can be, it's infringing upon constitutional rights guaranteed by our forefathers. And one person's rights end as infringing upon another's begins.
    I didn't expect to comment quite so much, but I guess I started a rant. Sorry. But still, Thomas, Way to go.

    ReplyDelete