ZEFRANK.COM - message board  

Go Back   ZEFRANK.COM - message board > DEBATE HALL
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 06-03-2007, 06:09 PM   #1
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11

Birthright is defined as a right, privilege, or possession, such as property, to which one is entitled by birth. In his article "Taking Luck Seriously" Matt Miller suggests that birthright results in the "inherited package of wealth, health, genes, looks, brains, talents and family." Approximately two-thirds {or more} of all wealth in the United States is inherited by birthright. In a recent study conducted at Ohio State University's Center for Human Resource Research, author Jay Zagorsky stated "Intelligence is not a factor for explaining wealth." Therefore, one may draw the conclusion that most business and political leaders are not intelligent. They did not earn their way into powerful positions but rather were manipulated into them because of birthright. This further begs the question: then why are they in charge? Why is it that our country is not run by the best and brightest? Does the merit system stop when one graduates from school? While intelligence is certainly not the only factor in determining who is most fit to lead our society, it is certainly a better measure than birthright. In over two hundred years the United States has failed at overcoming one of the biggest barriers to a just society. We refuse to find a way to limit the benefits of birthright and therefore make for a fairer {and better managed} society.

"A Decade of Executive Excess,'' the sixth annual survey of executive compensation by the Institute for Policy Studies and United for a Fair Economy, finds the ratio of top executive to factory worker pay has exploded this decade from 42 to 1 in 1980 to 419 to 1 last year. Why are we paying these people so much more if they don't have the intelligence and will to act in our best interest? What tangible proof is there that top executives contribute that much more to the successful attainment of corporate goals? Why aren't these executives {Enron} given longer prison terms than car thieves? If intelligence determined corporate leadership rather than birthright, the compensation ratio would be much lower because smart leaders would recognize it as the right thing to do whereas those that are there by birthright simply don't know any better {or care}. It is this ignorance perpetuated by birthright that is leading this country to collapse. Perhaps someday our society will be lead by intelligent people who see their own best interest as having promoted society's best interest.
JOEBIALEK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2007, 11:43 AM   #2
Blue's Clues
Audreyvgs's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: on Yur Last Nerve, huh?
Posts: 5,412
We have a republican president/Business is Business
I just LOVE what you haven't done with the place!
Audreyvgs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2007, 05:17 PM   #3
earth worker
lukkucairi's Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Location: on the planet
Posts: 5,844
paris hilton
lukkucairi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2007, 10:41 PM   #4
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11

good points
JOEBIALEK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2007, 11:58 PM   #5
constantly amazed
Brynn's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: in the labyrinth of shared happiness
Posts: 6,206
What about two recent presidents who were very unpopular with republicans -- Bill Clinton, who came from a poor, single-parent household, and Jimmy Carter the peanut farmer and humanitarian?
Al Gore was actually elected but the Supreme Court reversed the decision of the electorate - but yes, he was born into a very privileged situation, actually taking over the senate seat occupied by his father. However, just because his birthright was from the upper class does not mean that he would not have been a brilliant leader - imagine the better state the country would have been in had he'd been allowed to take the oath of office.
The Kennedy Family is another example of the wealthy privileged class taking responsibility along with their ill-gotten gain and being the voice of those less fortunate - and if their leadership had not been marred by tragedy and violence (and scandal - Chappaquiddick) they would have taken the country in a completely different direction.
So I'm just not sure about the validity of this complaint about "birthright" - sure, in the case of the Bush family, it's been disastrous for us, and it's definitely a big factor, but I think the problems are even bigger than "rich people suck" (note: my phrasing, not yours, Joe )

We could start with the seemingly small fact that the FCC did away with the Fairness Doctrine that required TV stations to give equal time to all candidates during elections. Ironically, as soon as the Republicans lost the House and Senate to the Democrats, the FCC has started talking about reinstituting that rule. That right there tells me that the FCC is in the pocket of some pretty Big Money that certainly involves birthright, I guess, but a lot more than that is afoot.
Rather than singling out individuals and their accident of birth, why not look at the whole lousy group involved in a huge, shadowy, obscenely rich and powerful global organization like The Carlyle Group to get an idea of why we've been truly and completely ****ed for a long time?
1. While sitting at your desk, lift your right foot off the floor and make clockwise circles.
2. Now, while doing this, draw the number "6" in the air with your right hand.
3. Your foot will change direction.
Brynn is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -3. The time now is 08:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.