Have you Ever been Swept Off Your Feet?

In both cases – whether the bubble was inflated with positive or negative energy – the participants in the bubble are being swept away further and further away from actual physical reality and start to see everything either ‘extremely negatively’ or ‘extremely positively’ – neither experience is grounded in reality – because the physical is neither positive or negative – it just is what it is.

And Then You Crash – Meconomics

In this little series, we’ve been investigating the phenomenon of inflation, how we in our daily lives participate in ‘inflating our reality’ and so, how we are on a personal level participating in the same principles/dynamics that we see playing out on a bigger scale when it comes to inflation, speculative bubbles and financial market crashes.

Welcoming New Life with Living Income Guaranteed

Comfort, security and nurturing are all things we wish are present when a baby comes into this world. Yet, these conditions are not a reality for many babies, as parents themselves like these things in their lives. In Pietermaritzburg, the capital of KwaZulu Natal province in South Africa, 3 to 5 babies are…

Humanity Washed Ashore

This was an excerpt of just one of the stories about the boy. Over the last few days, dozens have been written and published on various major news sites. What is more striking than the content of the posts, is the comments that are left on these articles. What is humanity’s response to such images, to such news?

Voting Fun – What does it Feel Like to Have a Say?

Now – before such increased direct political participation is a reality – let’s do a little test to see what it feels like. So – here are some mock-questions where you’re asked to give your input. Imagine that this relates to your direct reality (eg. your town) – and your answer has a weight that influences the outcome of the decision. Of course, in reality…

Showing posts with label fairness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fairness. Show all posts

05 May 2013

Day 221: Are Humans Equal? - Equality and Human Rights – Part 2

This Blog is a continuation to: Day 219: Equality and Human Rights – it is suggested to read the previous post for context.

In the last blog we ended with Plato’s assessment that humans were essentially unequal within being ‘different’. It’s interesting that the concept of Equality was not investigated further – if Equality did not lie within one’s characteristics which would define one’s position and function in society, then why are we not looking further? Could our Equality be somewhere else?

The point that every human shares, the point that all Living Beings share – is that they are alive. We are all Equally, living, breathing, beings – Here – on this Planet. So whether you are a person with the characteristics to make a philosopher or a person with the characteristics to make a baker – the fact still stands that you are a human and you are alive. This stands indeterminate of the variety of characteristics we share among ourselves that make us ‘different’. So even though we are ‘different’, we can, and are still, equal: in Life – and should treat each other accordingly.

Instead, we’ve taken the premise “We are different, and thus we are unequal” and have used this to justify why we do not value and respect one another equally, and used this as the foundation to create separation among ourselves – and in essence, alienate ourselves from one another, where we end up believing that just because we have certain capabilities that allow us to ‘climb to the top’ in society – that this means that we are ‘better’ and that those who do not share these capabilities are ‘less’ and should be treated accordingly. From this, we have created a system of ‘fairness’, a system of ‘merit’ – where you are treated ‘as you deserve’. We look at what a person can do and want to distribute resources according to what one has done with their abilities, skills and talents. Within this, we do not realise that one’s abilities, skills and talents – are completely arbitrary.

They are arbitrary in two ways:
In the first place they are arbitrary because one just happened to be born with a natural ‘knack’ or ‘gift’ for a particular point in reality. You may have been born with a ‘feel for music’, but you may as well have been born having a gift for building things or putting things together. This feel for music could have given you the possibility of becoming a wealthy music produce, while having your building skills may have led you to being a carpenter who barely gets by. So, given that we may naturally be good at things which differ from person to person – placing all one’s value into this limited point leads to two human beings living and experiencing a great difference in Living Standards, as the direct result of how we value different people due to their skillset, more over others.

Secondly they are arbitrary, because our skills, abilities and talents are closely linked to our environment. If you are born in a wealthy family, you have the resources available to develop, practice and perfect your skills. Very likely, you will be given a head start in society through your connections that place you in a profitable position. You could have been born with the exact same skillset, abilities and talents in a whole different environment. You could have been born in a family where resources were scarce – so scarce in fact, that your mother is unable to feed you adequately, stunting your growth and limiting your ability to live. So scarce, that by the age of six – your mother is crying over your lifeless body.

The same way, with the necessary resources available, everyone can be taught to be effective human beings – but this unfortunately, this is not happening because resources are currently not made available for everyone – only for those who can ‘afford’ it, those who apparently ‘deserve’ it.

So you see, measuring one’s Equality and within that measuring one’s Value based on a human’s skillset and abilities – is completely irrational and does not make any sense at all. The only common sensical thing to do – is to treat and value each one Equally on the premise of Life – within the realisation that I could have easily been you, and you could have easily been me. This means that if I want to able to live a dignified life, that you should be able to do this to – because after all, I could have been living my life in your shoes.

To be continued

Enhanced by Zemanta

28 April 2013

Day 218: Justice and Human Rights

Within this Blog I will be exploring different concepts of Justice and investigate what Justice would be in the context of upholding Constitutional Equality as What is Best for All in an Equal Money Capitalistic system. This will probably turn out to be a series rather than one blog-post. So - walk with me.

The word 'Justice' has been applied in different contexts, which can be laid out as follows:

1. Legal Justice
    a. Procedural Justice
    b. Substantive Justice
2. Moral Justice
    a. Distributive/Social Justice
        I. Justice as Entitlement
        II. Justice as Fairness

Legal Justice vs. Moral Justice

Legal justice refers to adherence to the law as a set of rules that determines part of how humans are to behave towards each other and towards the environment. Legal justice, then, as to do with the content of these laws as well as how these rules are established, applied and enforced.

Moral justice has to do with moral values of what is fair, right and correct. Moral justice then has to to with prescribing how humans ought to interact with each other and who ought to get what.

Looking at the relationship between moral justice and legal justice - it is obvious that legal justice attempts to specify moral justice in relation to specific circumstances and situations - where legal justice is the 'concretization' of moral justice. Now, what is fascinating - is that 'moral justice' is often seen as a 'fuzzy' concept, or having to do with 'fuzzy concepts' such as 'rightness' and 'goodness' - where it seems it is hard to define what those words actually entail - and yet, it is those words that serve as the basis for legal justice - where legal justice - where legal justice is the justice that is applied unto a population and is supposed to yield just results - and where it is trusted that this is what the legal system intends to do. But if we are not clear on what moral justice exactly is - then how can we assess that the legal system is in fact just?

We have in all countries and even between countries a complex legal system in place - but when the question is asked: 'but what is morally just?' - then we have to scratch our heads and we refer to the law - saying that 'well, whatever the law says'. So - we're running in circles where we are attempting to establish just and good societies, where we all have an opinion about what rules should be in place, and where each one thinks their proposed rule is the right one - but where no-one has ever stopped to sit and discuss what 'rightness' is - and where the time has not been taken to come to a definition of 'justice' that all can agree on.

Many parts of the legal system are, for instance, determined by customary law - and all that means is that legal status has been given to customs and 'how things are usually done' - this ultimately proving that we cannot trust that the legal system in any way has the purpose of justice at heart - but rather attempts to merely control transactions, interactions and individual behavior.

To be continued.
Enhanced by Zemanta

11 February 2013

Day 190: Fairness in the Work Place and Equal Money Capitalism

This blog post is in relation to a comment placed on one of our previous blog-posts.

"There must be a way to make sure that no job becomes one of paid idleness. Every job has to consist of activity or at least presence like working at reception desk which might be necessary even if there isn't much people coming and going at times, and this needs constant re-evaluation so that certain jobs don't become paid idleness because of variations like daily customer amount variation or something else.

Even if a company makes a lot of profit and there are partly or totally useless people employed at any given time, they must not be paid then."

How we deal with unemployment at the moment, is indeed to create unnecessary jobs. Here in South Africa, you'll find, for instance, that there are people in a shop who will place your groceries in bags and tie the bags for you - and that is their job. Or, in a gas station, you can just stay sitting in your car and the personnel of the gas station will do everything for you. In countries in Europe, such jobs do not exist. Each one bags their own groceries and fills up their own car at a gas station. It's often even uncomfortable for Europeans to have someone pack their groceries for them, because it really feels like you are treating this person as a slave - because you're very aware of how you can just do this simple task yourself.

What is not considered is that there are many important jobs to be done, which aren't being done at the moment. We can herein simply look at the environment and how little we actually interact with nature to identify where it requires support and to intervene where required. Environmental problems have escalated as companies have not taken responsibility for their polluting activities. Within EMC, each company will have an Environmental Department that ensures that what is taken from the Earth, either in the use of resources, or in terms of pollution, is given back or rectified as much as possible. These departments will create a large amount of meaningful jobs.

So - when we speak of Full Employment in EMC it is not to simply give a person a meaningless task or a job that barely requires any actual contribution, where the person is mostly spinning their thumbs - but to take on meaningful tasks, which the profit motive has not encouraged firms and individuals to address. The principles and regulations that will outline a company's responsibility within providing meaningful jobs will be aligned to the Equality Constitution where a company must perform these tasks within the consideration of what is best for all. Therefore, to create meaningless job and pay a person for not really contributing in any significant way, when there are meaningful jobs to be done - would be in conflict with the company's own principles and regulations as well as in conflict with the Constitution in general.

A company will thus be responsible to, indeed, regularly evaluate that all jobs are still meaningful and to restructure tasks where seen necessary. For instance, if two people in a firm doing two different tasks, no longer have much work to do and half the time sit around doing nothing, then one of the two can take on both tasks and the other can be given an entirely new job or can be assigned to a department that requires more assistance.

Herein - understand, that it will not be an option to simply no longer pay one's employees. A person's income is a person's lifeline and to simply take away a person's income is not acceptable, as it means to take away their access to everything they require to live a dignified life. So, where cases of 'paid idleness' are identified, it is the company's responsibility to employ labor in a meaningful way and to re-assign individuals where necessary. It is not the employees' 'fault' for which they now have to bear the consequences of not being paid.

"A company may not have the isolated right to decide whether a person is active and productive enough - there must be global standards on defining a sufficient amount of activity per day or hour, and those change with the times (because of technology etc.) and with the types of jobs. For Equality."

Possibly, we'll have guidelines in terms of how long a person should preferably work. However, we cannot set these things in stone. The reason is that every person is different. Every person has different abilities and capabilities. Where possible, assistance will be given to enhance a person's skills, abilities and capabilities, however, certain points are genetically defined or are the result of behavioral or physical patterns that are not easy to break through. Consideration and understanding is required therefore, for each one's individual strengths and weaknesses. Every person's contribution will stand in relation to that persons' capabilities. Therefore, fairness doesn't stand in relation to everyone doing the same or doing the same amount of work - it stands in relation to everyone equally contributing what they can contribute. 

Enhanced by Zemanta