Not sure if anyone caught the article about the college student that did a political science study on students with high GPA's. The premise goes something like this:
The student surveyed other students who had 3.8 or higher grade point averages and asked them two questions. The first question was: Do you believe in wealth redistribution through taxation?
Many of the students answered "yes" with various explanations that you can see if you do a simple google on GPA redistribution. YouTube has many videos as well as other media outlets so this experiment appears to have taken place many times over the course of the past few years. The brilliant part of this social experiment is the follow up question and the reactions that go along with it.
The follow up question goes something like this: Since you believe in wealth redistribution, would you like to redistribute some of your GPA to a student who is struggling to make it?
Everyone of the students who answered "yes" to the wealth redistribution questions answered "no" to the GPA redistribution question.
To be fair, this is not an apples to apples question, but the general theme of the questioning holds considerable merit. Needless to say many of the students reactions were typical along those lines citing the question as being unfair in its nature. Other students actually had never thought through their political position on taxation and you could tell this question challenged them to reevaluate some long held positions. So lets knock out some of the unfairness of the question that many will argue:
1). You can't inherit a 4.0 GPA like one can be born into money: Fair enough. Some citizens do win the genetic lottery and are born into wealth, but if they are unwise with their investments those riches could be squandered quickly leaving the next generation to fend for themselves. Even if one could inherit a 4.0 GPA would those same students be willing to redistribute their GPA? My anecdotal reaction would be they would not be. They would still have to study and progress to maintain their lofty inherited GPA's and although they may be more inclined to assist others they would not be willing to sacrifice GPA points for no gain unto themselves.
2). GPA's are capped at a top level and income is not: This is an interesting argument for which I have several simple answers. A). This has been tried and is also know as communism. Just ask the former Soviet Union how that all worked out. B). This scenario also produces very little incentive to achieve and progress as a society. C). This would be unconstitutional but we are playing what if, so who cares about the constitution. If we actually could implement this history shows us the societal structure we would have and sure enough everything boils down to 99% lower middle class with a very wealthy 1% ruling class with no possibility to progress. No thank you, I would rather take my chances here in the US under a Republic where I can go from nothing to Bill Gates. ( FYI these are the remaining communist countries: China, Cuba, Laos, North Korea and Vietnam ) Care to trade places with anyone in one of those countries??
3). Everyone is being taught the same curriculum but not everyone has the same upbringing: This question could be phrased a different way. Lets state it like this... In the classroom everyone is hearing the same message and has the same opportunity to take notes, ask questions etc. Outside the confines of the classroom not everyone had the same upbringing / opportunity. I can see how this could affect ones future ability to earn income, and in some respects this is the most difficult one to define logically. There are so many factors one has to consider when addressing this issue that it would be virtually impossible to give a just answer. When I boil this down in my mind a few things stand out. The government does not offer equal outcomes but only guarantees equal opportunity. I can't compare my life to someone who grew up in the ghetto who had a single parent that work two jobs to support the kids and was never around. What I can state is that everyone has something inside them that drives them. Some people are more motivated to achieve then others. Some have a greater work ethic and internal drive to not be satisfied with mediocre results. This country is filled with success stories of people who came from nothing but worked hard to get ahead and make a name for themselves. Just like those students sitting in that classroom hearing that same lecture. Not everyone will have the same level of dedication to study as hard as the next person. Some students will be content putting in half the effort getting by with a C and other students will put fourth a greater effort and work harder to get the A. Our economy works in a similar way.
I agree this is a loaded question proposed for some shock value, but I think the merit of the question holds real value even if one could argue based on the details above. I am sure there are more ways to break down comparison and if you think of any please let me know. I am always interested in hearing feedback.
No comments:
Post a Comment