Quote:

d) that perhaps the reason we blame the non-achievers is to justify the excessive rewards that accrue to the successful and to make sure that wealth isn't more equally spread than it is now. The justification being that there must be no limit set on individual wealth in case the would-be achiever decides it isn't worth getting up in the morning to try in the first place. Why? is there no other motivation than personal advancement and making yourself as noticeably distinct and superior to others as you possibly can? is there no other motivation than wealth to the point of total invulnerability and total control over the political process in your own favour?




There are many different reasons why some people do not prosper. And I have rarely seen any criticism made toward people who are clearly at a disadvantage for reasons of health, age, intellect or othjer similar reason that cannot be easily changed.

When I see blame placed, it is nearly always on the able-bodied people who have everything they need to succeed, except they are not willing to work that hard. My son has several friends like that. They are young, strong, smart as a whip, persuasive... everything you could hope for to help you through life.. but they can collect enough money on welfare to "get by", and so they do.

If they had learned to be content with a bad situation, I would admire them. But they are learning to be incompetent, which is different. Why? Because their incompetence forces others who are also struggling, to pay for their lifestyle, however small it may be.

And there's more: They're also learning NOT TO BE CONTENT with the free money they already collect. So its the worst of both worlds. Lack of contentment and lack of productivity.

Perhaps I have taken your observation in a direction you did not intend.. but if you have a defense for people like I just described, I would be interested in hearing it.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ey71h8ep047758h/AAC12jNM0Hz9Q8zsh5iDeqNHa?dl=0