2
2
0
With all the discussions and threads on here, I thought it would be time to post a short essay I wrote several years ago. I call it the “Fairness Essay”. I wrote this a couple months before the 2008 election to further several discussions going on throughout the country with many issues. It was not an affront towards any particular candidate or party but a way to invoke dialogue. I kept the writing as it is though since I wrote it. Yes, there is a very specific purpose to it but I’ll leave it up to you, the reader, to discern what it is. For many, it may seem obvious but it is not. There is also an additional question related to this. If you would like to respond, by all means but please do so respectfully and provide reasonable feedback, whether positive or negative.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fairness. What is fairness? I’ve been thinking a lot about this not only about life in general but especially with this election coming up. Before I get into the crux of the matter let’s start by defining fairness or, more specifically, fair.
Merriam-Webster defines fair as “marked by impartiality and honesty: free from self interest, prejudice or favoritism”. Synonyms include JUST, EQUITABLE, IMPARTIAL, OBJECTIVE. JUST, in regards to Fair, implies an exact following of a standard of what is right and proper. EQUITABLE implies a less rigorous standard than JUST and usually suggests equal treatment of all concerned. IMPARTIAL stresses an absence of favor or prejudice. OBJECTIVE stresses a tendency to view events or persons as apart from oneself and one’s own interest or feelings.(1)
Now, how does fairness come into play in our lives? How do we properly judge what is fair when arbitrating disputes or, more in general, giving out rewards and punishments? Most of us do this based on our past experiences but mostly based on the specific workings/ideology of the parties concerned. For example, you hire two men to work on your lawn. Both men are of equal fitness, intelligence and capacity to work. Your lawn is equally in disarray on both sides and you task each man to clean up a side. One individual mows, weeds, bags the trash, bug sprays, and cleans up after himself. The other just mows the lawn. I believe that most, in fairness, would pay the first man more than the second because he did a far better job. Now, what if we paid both individuals the same amount? Is this fair? Why or why not? This goes into the heart of my idea of fairness and how to institute it across the board throughout the United States. Bear with me on this. Take a few seconds to think about each item then go to the next.
First of all, everyone would be treated exactly the same. Everyone who is of working age, 18 and older, would be paid the exact same wage of $50,000 a year. No more, no less. Not a penny. It does not matter what you do or what position you have, everyone will receive the same amount. Is this fair?
Second, everyone would have the exact same car and house with both items having the exact same features, colors, and furniture. Is this starting to sound fair?
Third, everyone would receive the exact same type of medical care. Across the board. No favoritism, nothing.
Fourth, no one is allowed to buy anything. Everything is free but everyone will receive the exact same thing as everyone else.
Fifth, everyone will have plenty of food to eat for each person but everyone will eat the exact same thing in the exact same portion every day. The meals will change from day to day but everyone will have the same meal. Meals will be brought to each house at the exact same time for each meal. There will be no storing of food, either from attempted purchases, which will be illegal, or from meal leftovers. All leftover food from meals will be discarded.
Sixth, everyone will have the same clothing. There will be no makeup, jewelry or headgear.
Seventh, there will be no money making mechanisms, i.e. interest yielding accounts, bonds, stocks. This will also be illegal since you can’t buy anything anyways.
Does this sound fair? Can we do this? It IS fair for everyone. What do you think? Why or why not can this be accomplished? Give reasons for either argument, whichever side you take.
Footnote
1. Merriam Webster’s Dictionary
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fairness. What is fairness? I’ve been thinking a lot about this not only about life in general but especially with this election coming up. Before I get into the crux of the matter let’s start by defining fairness or, more specifically, fair.
Merriam-Webster defines fair as “marked by impartiality and honesty: free from self interest, prejudice or favoritism”. Synonyms include JUST, EQUITABLE, IMPARTIAL, OBJECTIVE. JUST, in regards to Fair, implies an exact following of a standard of what is right and proper. EQUITABLE implies a less rigorous standard than JUST and usually suggests equal treatment of all concerned. IMPARTIAL stresses an absence of favor or prejudice. OBJECTIVE stresses a tendency to view events or persons as apart from oneself and one’s own interest or feelings.(1)
Now, how does fairness come into play in our lives? How do we properly judge what is fair when arbitrating disputes or, more in general, giving out rewards and punishments? Most of us do this based on our past experiences but mostly based on the specific workings/ideology of the parties concerned. For example, you hire two men to work on your lawn. Both men are of equal fitness, intelligence and capacity to work. Your lawn is equally in disarray on both sides and you task each man to clean up a side. One individual mows, weeds, bags the trash, bug sprays, and cleans up after himself. The other just mows the lawn. I believe that most, in fairness, would pay the first man more than the second because he did a far better job. Now, what if we paid both individuals the same amount? Is this fair? Why or why not? This goes into the heart of my idea of fairness and how to institute it across the board throughout the United States. Bear with me on this. Take a few seconds to think about each item then go to the next.
First of all, everyone would be treated exactly the same. Everyone who is of working age, 18 and older, would be paid the exact same wage of $50,000 a year. No more, no less. Not a penny. It does not matter what you do or what position you have, everyone will receive the same amount. Is this fair?
Second, everyone would have the exact same car and house with both items having the exact same features, colors, and furniture. Is this starting to sound fair?
Third, everyone would receive the exact same type of medical care. Across the board. No favoritism, nothing.
Fourth, no one is allowed to buy anything. Everything is free but everyone will receive the exact same thing as everyone else.
Fifth, everyone will have plenty of food to eat for each person but everyone will eat the exact same thing in the exact same portion every day. The meals will change from day to day but everyone will have the same meal. Meals will be brought to each house at the exact same time for each meal. There will be no storing of food, either from attempted purchases, which will be illegal, or from meal leftovers. All leftover food from meals will be discarded.
Sixth, everyone will have the same clothing. There will be no makeup, jewelry or headgear.
Seventh, there will be no money making mechanisms, i.e. interest yielding accounts, bonds, stocks. This will also be illegal since you can’t buy anything anyways.
Does this sound fair? Can we do this? It IS fair for everyone. What do you think? Why or why not can this be accomplished? Give reasons for either argument, whichever side you take.
Footnote
1. Merriam Webster’s Dictionary
Posted in these groups: 
Fairness
Fairness
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 11
10
10
0
I'm glad life is not fair, because I've been blessed far more than I deserve.
(10)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Sir, interesting comment, and from a personal stand point I agree. Can you elaborate a bit? Also, any thoughts on what I wrote above?
(0)
(0)
CH (MAJ) (Join to see)
I like what you wrote. It is a great primer for a discussion about free market and capitalism. Two things that make the
American dream possible. I was thinking more essoteric in my comment. I certainly did not deserve to be born in this great country or inherit all the affluence that comes from being an American. But I also see that God's hand has guided me and helped me stay the course in difficult times, despite my socioeconomic status. I count all that I have as nothing, except by His grace and mercy. Like Job, I came into this world with nothing and I will surly leave with nothing, except the eternal relationship I have with my Lord and savior.
American dream possible. I was thinking more essoteric in my comment. I certainly did not deserve to be born in this great country or inherit all the affluence that comes from being an American. But I also see that God's hand has guided me and helped me stay the course in difficult times, despite my socioeconomic status. I count all that I have as nothing, except by His grace and mercy. Like Job, I came into this world with nothing and I will surly leave with nothing, except the eternal relationship I have with my Lord and savior.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Sir, while I agree with most of your comment I do disagree with part of it. My writing can be a great primer for discussing free market and capitalism but it is not the crux of the writing. The concepts of free market and capitalism are tertiary to the overall gist which is much much deeper. It took me the better part of a week to fully write it out because I wanted others to fully think of what we attempt to consider fair, but not what is actually fair. There is in fact a total singular answer to my writing.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
2
2
0
Redistribution of wealth takes the motivation away from the person that goes the extra mile to do a better job on the yard. Additionally, it gives no incentive for the lazy to be productive. It sounds like you may have been reading 1984 recently.
To be fair, the examples you gave are not fair to the ones who work hard to achieve better. Honestly, it is not fair to those that are too lazy to work hard to achieve greater. Hunger can be a good motivator to work. It actually sounds like Communism.
To be fair, the examples you gave are not fair to the ones who work hard to achieve better. Honestly, it is not fair to those that are too lazy to work hard to achieve greater. Hunger can be a good motivator to work. It actually sounds like Communism.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Very interesting. Do go on, LCpl. In the over five years since I wrote this, you are by far the closest to the real answer.
(1)
(0)
LCpl Steve Wininger
After reading it a second, and third time the greatest unfairness is taking away each persons identity. We all make the same, eat the same, wear the same cloths, get the same treatment. A greater tragedy than taking away a persons motivation, is to essentially steal their identity. Even a service member dressed in the same uniform with the same rank going to the same chow hall can be recognized. I will use a Staff Sargent as an example. One was just recently promoted, and does not have as much time in service as the other who is up for promotion, therefore their pay is not the same. They eat different meals, and one decides to have seconds.
(0)
(0)
LCpl Steve Wininger
Not only is it unfair to treat everyone equally for unequal work, it is also unfair to take away a persons identity and tell them when they can eat, what they can eat, how much they can eat, what they can wear, etc. It sounds like the liberal lefts agenda playbook.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google