When I think of abuse that people give out in public - no, I don't.
That line of yours gave me a chuckle when I read the following one!
Right, you first: back up your statement that "one of the major problems with today's society is the near complete absence of common courtesy".
You've "backed it up" for me with that first quote!
However, when I prefaced my opinion with, "It appears to me," it proved more literal than I initially intended. Everywhere I go: roadways, airports, stores, restaurants, sporting events, etc -- I see a lack of common courtesy. You mentioned that you are aware of "abuse that people give out in public". When I look around, I not only see abuse, but rudeness, impatience, and a general lack of common courtesy as well.
To be fair, there are those of us who still like to extend a complement, allow someone to merge, say "please" and "thank you", etc; but it does seem to be more and more "out of fashion", for lack of a better term.
Given the progressive mantra of, "Intolerance must not be tolerated!", I feel we have become too tolerant of the abuse that you see in public, as well as the lack of common courtesy I see in public. So, perhaps in our determined efforts to be tolerant (for the sake of tolerance?), we have only ourselves to blame...
doshell wrote: "...I meant to say "as successful in life as they want"..."
Perhaps it would be more accurately phrased as, "as successful in life as their personal capabilities and motivations allow, with no guarantees." Rather, that has always been my perception. Capitalism encourages and motivates one to aim high. Even if one never reaches one's ultimate pinnacle of success (or even gets close to it), the chances of improving one's situation in the process are far better.
Communism motivates... um... I'm at a loss here. You have little to no control over your own success and on the chance that you do excel at something, the reward for your efforts is that your productivity is divided up, against your will, with whomever the central controlling authority decides is next in line -- but it does equalize "fairness", albeit arbitrarily.
But you are absolutely correct! Neither is a perfect system. As I said before, everyone has a choice to make, up to a certain point, ie:
Those in a capitalist system are generally free to migrate into a communist system if they so choose. Those in a communist system generally are not allowed the choice to migrate to a capitalist system (or any other system) without the permission of the central controlling authority.
Hopefully, they choose what's best for their situation.
It is the liberal-left that aspires to the idealized abstraction of a perfect society where everything down to the individual is tightly controlled and regulated by a centralized, beneficent govt.There are no winners and no losers -- everyone is perfectly equal.
In actual practice, neither a perfect market nor a perfect government is possible.
Generally speaking, there is only the seemingly endless struggle between the liberal-left which demands "equality in outcome" through govt-control over individuals with a heavy intolerance for self-responsibility/self-sufficiency -and- the conservative-right which promotes "equality in opportunity" through limited govt-control with a high expectation for self-responsibility/self-sufficiency.
You places yer bets... you takes yer chances... Choose wisely.
Hackers of the world, unite!