Of course, this misses the point: In a country with rapidly widening structural socio-economic classes (as is dramatically happening now in the US -- see Charles Murray's latest study to get a sense of the magnitude of the divide) no matter how the lower or under-classes work, they will not ever catch up with the upper elites.
This professor would have been more accurate had he divided the class into 10% of the students, and 90%, and only given A + to the upper 5%, and A to the remaining 5%, and then divvied up among the remaining 90% Fs, Ds, and a smattering of Cs. But it seems that the professor -- clearly more taken with destructive competition than the more common societal cooperation -- was more intent on making a political assertion than offering a genuine lesson in class economics. Cheers, Lawry On Feb 16, 2012, at 4:36 PM, Wm. Scott Smith wrote: > > > > "SOME IDEAS ARE SO STUPID ONLY INTELLECTUALS BELIEVE THEM." > George Orwell > > When the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great, > but when government takes all the reward away, no one > will try or want to succeed. > > Is this man truly a genius? > Checked out and this is true...it DID happen! > > <image001.jpg> > > An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never > failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That > class had insisted that Obama's socialism worked and that no one would be > poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. > > The professor then said, "OK, we will have an experiment in this class on > Obama's plan". All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same > grade so no one will fail and no one will receive an A.... (substituting > grades for dollars - something closer to home and more readily understood by > all). > > After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The > students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were > happy. As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had > studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free > ride too so they studied little. > > The second test average was a D! No one was happy. > > When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F. > > As the tests proceeded, the scores never increased as bickering, blame and > name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the > benefit of anyone else. > > To their great surprise, ALL FAILED and the professor told them that > socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the > effort to succeed is great, but when government takes all the reward away, no > one will try or want to succeed. > It could not be any simpler than that. (Please pass this on) > > > Remember, there IS a test coming up. The 2012 elections. > > > These are possibly the 5 best sentences you'll ever read and all applicable > to this experiment: > > 1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy > out of prosperity. > > 2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for > without receiving. > > 3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does > not first take from somebody else. > > 4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it! > > 5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because > the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets > the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get > what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation. > > Can you think of a reason for not sharing this? Neither could I. > > > > > > >
