Do you agree with a "Robin Hood" model in society? Do you think state should intervene and distribute the goods accordingly to its citizens? Do you think rich should sometimes be *punished* for being rich? I am excluding taxes since I am speaking of direct state intervention in every financial area. Even in the slightly capitalist era in the beginning years of Bolshevik regime when Lenin allowed Nepmen to exist, he charged them more, for example on education because they were better off than most of the population. Nepmen felt that the state was using them to remedy the results of the unsuccessful war communism policies and in the mean while punishing them for being capitalists on ideological pretexts.
I am not asking you whether it is substantial or impractical, I want you to express your opinions on this system from whichever perspective you want. It maybe from a religious,moral, juridical or philosophical perspective. Is this regime justifiable? If so, what accounts for it?
2007-09-04 11:48:06 · 17 answers · asked by :] 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I've read the answers and most of you propose and assume that someone who works gets the same money as someone who doesn't bother to work. But why not think of it the other way around? What makes the dandy son of Mr.So Rich superior in terms of living standards to an artist who actually works hard for long hours but doesn't enjoy the benefits of welfare as much as the dandy does?
2007-09-04 20:55:27 · update #1
No I don't....
I was homeless 15 years ago...and now I am almost finished with my BA and I am going straight to my masters. I never asked for a hand out, I never received any type of assistance.
It sickens me that I have worked so hard for everything that I have, only for it to be taken to give to those who refused to do anything with their lives.
Sorry, I may sound callous, I may sound selfish, but when I see people on the streets where I was 15 years ago, I only feel that they are there by their own doings. They made the choices that they made. It is their life to live.
Sorry that I was smart enough to get off the drugs and make something of myself....but I should not be penalized for it.
As the saying goes....you made your bed.
EDIT TO ADD-----
As far as society being a "team"....well that is nice in theory, but even those who aren't very good on the team, still show up to practice and work as hard as the "star" players. I have yet to see a "team" in which those who aren't very good get to skip practice all the time and still get the bennies of being part of the team.
2007-09-04 11:57:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Maybe the Robin Hood from movies, like the Disney version, in the sense that he had a very strong moral code, even if he was a thief, but in reality Robin Hood was incredibly violent, both to the poor and rich, not only a thief but a murderer and hardly a role model for anyone.
2016-05-21 05:47:19 · answer #2 · answered by jasmine 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I guess the Robin Hood Model as you put it, makes people feels good, that someone is looking out for us.
The problem is it also makes people believe that all rich people are evil, and that the only way you can get what you need is to steal it or to wait for the hand out.
Look at it this way, if the Gov. gives you $800 a month + $100 for food (food stamps) + free or income based rent and all you have to do is check in every year or so, and not work.
Would you take it?
Now lets assume the education level of this person getting this is only high enough to be qualified for minimum wage jobs.
Wouldn't that person be foolish to work for less money than they get sitting at home?
Why would those people try to better themselfs, and get off the "Robin Hood" dole?
on the same token, why should someone who works hard, lose all that as a punishment for their hard work?
2007-09-04 12:01:30 · answer #3 · answered by Insane 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Society is like a team. Some player are good and some are not that good but all are part of a team. The good players get to play more than the not that good and enjoy better salaries than the not that good but they still a team. Those not that good players are the one who give a rest to the stars. You may want to replace the not that good players but in society that would mean either killing them or sending them to some other country. Robin Hood... He would only be like Jordan but passing the ball more often.
The question is isn't the rich rich because they take from the poor?
2007-09-04 12:06:43 · answer #4 · answered by Jose R 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
a robin hood model assumes that there is a tyrant or tyrant class that unfairly rules and profits from the labor of the workers. i don't think that is quite the case in this country, yet.
i do feel that there should be a more equitable situations as regards healthcare and education. many people abuse welfare or whatever that you want to call it, but i do not feel that is good enough reason to shut everyone else out.
i respect people who have gotten out of bad situations by hard work. there are many people who thru no effort of their own have got it made. they know someone or are related to someone. often, these are the people that are against many social programs.
2007-09-04 12:26:58 · answer #5 · answered by tomjohn2 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well... it's a very difficult question...
on one hand... I've met few rich people that I would say "honestly" earned their money... most I know did it by stealing and blatantly taking advantage of others...
but is "stealing" (as some would say) their money any better than what they do?
it's all very sticky... I favor a system like the U.S. system more than an actual "robin hood" model... a graduated taxation system more than actually "taking everything"
but is it justifiable? as much as any other... someone always seems to get the "shaft" one way or the other...
2007-09-04 12:31:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, I don't believe in a strict robin hood model. A fair deal, square deal, maybe even a new deal but certainly not a bum deal for the poor and middle class. Scare tactics of Communism etc are bantied about when nothing could be farther from the truth. As the great liberal President Franklin Roosevelt said, "We have noting to fear but fear itself".
2007-09-04 12:18:00 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, that is a socialist Hillary point of view. Think of it this way:
What person would go to college for 12 years to be a doctor, work long hours and run up a huge student loan debt. Then person number 2 is lazy and maybe doesn't care to work too hard and not too often. The government takes away Mr. Doctor's money to give it to Mr. Lazy. They each earn $75,000 now. So? Do you think anyone in their right mind is going to bother with the stress of a job like a doctor or nurse if their income will just be taken away to be given to some lazy person that likes to play video games all day? Nope.
2007-09-04 12:49:31 · answer #8 · answered by Julie H 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Mostly, I disagree with the Robin Hood model, although I am for tempering capitalism with a few regulations to keep extreme exploitation in check.
The Robin Hood model, or socialism, redistributes wealth based upon "need", not upon "reward". You can work twice as hard as the next guy only to be forced to split your paycheck with him. I think that is wrong.
2007-09-04 12:15:26 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
My opinion is that the state should help the citizens and that the rich shouldn't be punished for their wealth...they earned every cent that they worked for, so why take it away?
Edit- To answer your other question, my response would have to be...that's life and things are just not fair. Makes you feel sorry for the artist though :((
2007-09-04 16:30:23 · answer #10 · answered by Qu'est ce que tu penses? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋