Life. It’s not fair, nor will it ever be.
I came across a column by John Stossel titled, “Making it Fair.” In his column, he quoted a Michael Moore interview where Moore declared…
Filmmaker Michael Moore took this notion about fairness to its intuitive conclusion during an interview with Laura Flanders of GRITtv, saying of rich people’s fortunes: “That’s not theirs! That’s a national resource! That’s ours!” As is typical, Moore was confused or disingenuous. In our corporatist economy, some fortunes are indeed made illegitimately though political means. The privileges that produce those fortunes should be abolished. But contrary to Moore, incomes are not “national resources.” — Washington Examiner.
To the collectivist, what is your is his, and in the case of Moore and others like him, what is theirs, is theirs. In reality, they’re a pack of thieves. Fairness, to them, is taking the assets, hard earned assets, of others. Fairness, to such as Moore, is equal outcome…as long as that same rule isn’t applied to them. I haven’t seen Moore, nor any of the Hollywood libs, donating their fortunes to those in need.
Liberals show tremendous compassion in pushing for generous government spending to help the neediest people at home and abroad. Yet when it comes to individual contributions to charitable causes, liberals are cheapskates.
Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, “Who Really Cares,” cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals. A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals. — NY Times.
When we examine the differences between the “fairness” liberals preach, and the “fairness” liberals practice, we discover that liberals really do not believe in fairness. No, they’ll do whatever they can to insure “fairness” is biased in their favor.
Liberals complain that conservative principles and actions are unfair. In Obama’s last State of the Union speech, he mentioned “fairness” at least nine times. Why is there such an emphasis on “being fair” by the libs? One possibility is their inability to understand that there is no fairness in life.
Life is not fair. There is no guarantee of fairness. If life was fair, no child would die through accident or illness. Pediatric diabetes would disappear. Every mother, father and child would be happy and healthy.
But life is not fair. Some families are not happy while others are. Some children die in accidents, such as the man and two children who died in a fire this week as the mother, who had just returned home from work, watched.
If life is not fair, why are conservatives, when interviewed, judge themselves happy more often than liberals? In an exchange on PBS Newshour host Jeffrey Brown, correspondent Paul Solman, Lori Sanders of the American Enterprise Institute and others, the topic was happiness.
PAUL SOLMAN: How happy are you, scale of one to four, one not at all happy, four very happy?
LORI SANDERS, American Enterprise Institute: I’m a four.
PAUL SOLMAN: A four?
LORI SANDERS: I’m very happy.
PAUL SOLMAN: Lori Sanders works at the conservative Washington think tank the American Enterprise Institute. A few blocks away, Occupy D.C.er Eric is on the more liberal end of the spectrum.
What number would you give yourself?
MAN: A one.
PAUL SOLMAN: Are you unhappy, do you think, because of the inequality, economic inequality in this country?
MAN: Well, yes.
PAUL SOLMAN: Study after study, it turns out, finds conservatives happier than liberals.
Yale social psychologist Jaime Napier has a theory as to why.
JAIME NAPIER, Yale University: Economic inequality really does affect people’s subjective well-being.
PAUL SOLMAN: Napier’s work has convinced her conservatives are happier than liberals because they think there’s equality of opportunity in America.
JAIME NAPIER: One of the biggest correlates with happiness in our surveys was the belief of a meritocracy, which is the belief that anybody who works hard can make it. That was the biggest predictor of happiness. That was also one of the biggest predictors of political ideology. So, the conservatives were much higher on these meritocratic beliefs than liberals were.
PAUL SOLMAN: Liberals like the folks we found at Occupy D.C., who don’t think the opportunities out there are equal these days. Their message is clear: The system is not fair.
WOMAN: Everybody here at this Occupy movement is here because they have had enough. So, they’re angry. And chances are, you know, people here are very unhappy with the way that our society works.
WOMAN: I believe that things should be equal, or people should have more of an opportunity to become closer to the 1 percent, because, right now, it’s like the 1 percent is the 1 percent, the 99 is the 99, and we kind of don’t stand a chance.
PAUL SOLMAN: The conservative AEI staffers, on the other hand, think we do.
How many of you, on average, think Americans get what they deserve they deserve economically?
Reza Jan, who grew up in Pakistan, believe in Horatio Algerism for all, sort of.
REZA JAN, American Enterprise Institute: I would say not everybody is able to pull off those kinds of success stories. But, in this country, more than any other, for the work you do, you are able to better yourself.
PAUL SOLMAN: That’s true no matter who you are, said Jesse Blumenthal.
JESSE BLUMENTHAL, American Enterprise Institute: The “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” notion works here more than really anywhere else in the world.
PAUL SOLMAN: Now, optimism alone doesn’t determine contentment. Religion boosts happiness. So does marriage. But Napier’s research accounted for that.
JAIME NAPIER: We adjusted for education, for income, for marital status, religion, people who lived urban vs. rural, all kinds of things. So, you know, on average, just your ideology alone is an independent predictor of your subjective well-being.
ARTHUR BROOKS, American Enterprise Institute: It is true that conservatives tend to be less concerned about income inequality.
Arthur Brooks, president of the AEI, and the author of “Gross National Happiness,” agrees with Napier about the conservative happiness edge.
ARTHUR BROOKS: Conservatives think that fairness is one in which outcomes are based on merit and people start with more or less equal opportunities, or at least we’re working for equal opportunities. If you believe those things, and you see that some person makes more than others or the top 1 percent is breaking away than the bottom 99 percent, that’s not going to affect your happiness very much at all.
Look closely at that last statement. “Conservatives think that fairness is one in which outcomes are based on merit and people start with more or less equal opportunities, or at least we’re working for equal opportunities.”
That is the primary difference between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives take action—personally, to better themselves. Liberals wait for someone else to take action so they can take advantage of the results. The conservative governs, through his own actions, his life. The liberal subordinates his life to the governance of others.
No, life isn’t fair. No one in touch with reality believes that. Fairness and happiness is what we create for ourselves.
AND Liberals use our money to buy votes to propagate their brand of governing! Don’t forget that!