zlacker

What’s wrong with the idea of sharing?

>>pwm+(OP)
Nothing, unless you force a dog which hunted its bone to share it with one who slept the whole day, and call it "equality".

>>pwm+(OP)
I can't answer that until we establish what you mean by "wrong".

>>kingof+U1
Or you can share 5% of your hunt to keep the lazy dog from attacking you while you sleep. Is it 'fair'? No. Is it a wise move? Maybe.

>>kingof+U1
That's fair and i don't delude myself that perfect equality exists in any meaningful sense. Continuously aspiring towards a kinder and fairer society however is a good thing.

>>ddalex+E3
Or I can eliminate that dog so I don't have to share my 5% of the kill every single time.

>>kingof+U1
Sleeping the whole day is an interesting metaphor for living off of charity or being homeless, two demographics notorious for being unhappier than the working population on average. Did you choose it because spending whole days in bed is a classic symptom of depression,the illness that makes one unhappier than the average employee? I'm not sure transfering money from the later to the former would correct the inequality between their respective qualities of life, so I wouldn't call that equality, no.

>>ddalex+E3
Lazy dog is well-rested, can probably take more than 50% from a tired dog that hunted, if not even outright killing the hunter.

>>ddalex+E3
> Or you can share 5% of your hunt to keep the lazy dog from attacking you while you sleep. Is it 'fair'? No. Is it a wise move? Maybe.

Then you'll get used to share your 5% , after some time he'll want to have 6.75% and you'll think- well , compared to 5% additional 1.75% is nothing for my safety! After some time other dogs will start to look with keen eyes on lazy dog lifestyle.

>>throwa+x4
Or the other dogs can pack together to eliminate you.

Considering the number of times this has happened in human history, any ideas of kingly invincibility you may have are unlikely to be realistic.

>>TheOth+Z7
That's completely fine. The problem with this entire thread is the thought that there is some kind of inherent value to human life. There isn't.

Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. It's the nature of any gamble, and life certainly is one.

>>jfsid+s5
Having no ability to read your mind, I cannot tell of you are trying to invent an alternative meaning of my comment to beat a strawman, or you are really a great poet.

>>ddalex+E3
I agree, we can probably reduce tensions in society by some redistribution. But there's an important point to which too many people are blind: you cannot do it without limits. As more and more of the bone is taken away for "sharing", tensions start to grow again just from other side. And economic motivation is more, and more distorted leaving less bones for all.

>>kingof+DQ
I find my reply in the spirit of your comment. What's wrong with sharing is that sharing is inequality...

>>jfsid+Vs1
So you are not a great poet then, and it's strawman argument.