Wednesday, December 1, 2010

A Test of Socialism

An economics professor at Texas said he had never failed a single student before but had once failed an entire class. The class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said okay, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism.

All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A. After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset, and the students who studied little were happy. But, as the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too, so they studied little.
The second test average was a D! No one was happy. When the third test rolled around, the average was an F.

The scores never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for anyone else. All failed, to their great surprise. And the professor told them that socialism would ultimately fail because the harder to succeed, the greater the reward, but when a government takes all the reward away, no one will try or succeed.

5 comments:

  1. It's more like this actually

    An economics professor said he had never failed a single student before but had, once, failed an entire class, minus one person. That class had insisted that capitalism worked and that most would be poor and one would be rich, a great way to motivate people. The professor then said ok, we will have an experiment in this class on capitalism.

    Since the class only dealt with one subject, the person with the highest score would get an A, the next best score would get a B, the following score would get a C, so on and so forth. After the first test the grades were given out. No matter how hard someone studied there could only be one person with an A, one person with a B, one person with a C, and one person with a D. All other students were given the lowest grades, as some the top students already had an advantage knowing the subject material.

    But, as the second test rolled around, the students who received an F on the the previous test knew even if they got an A on this test their average would still be a C; so they studied less than what they had previously. The second test the person who had an A on the first test got a A. Previous test takers who had a B,C,D now got an F. No one was happy, except the guy who got an A. When the 3rd test rolled around the average was an F for everyone except the guy who got an A on the previous test.

    The scores never increased as bickering, blame, name calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of themselves. All failed, except the guy who got A's, and the professor told them that capitalism would also ultimately fail because when only one person can get the reward, the effort to succeed is hampered; but when government takes all the rewards and gives them to a few; no one else can or will succeed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wow, what a well thought out, intelligent reply. Other than the fact that capitalism does not work in the way described above whatsoever, you really are a sharp one. There are so many things wrong with your stupid statement it isn't worth replying. I will say this. A large number of Americans feel they have received an "A" every day when they wake up. It doesn't take a billion dollars to receive an "A". Capitalism rewards all who are willing to take responsibility for themselves, be self sufficient, and work as hard as they need to in order to live the lifestyle they wish to.

    ReplyDelete
  3. brilliant response

    ReplyDelete
  4. Actually, I might argue that it could be more like this:

    An economics professor in California said she had never given an individual student an A+ before but had once had an entire class get an A+. That class had, at the beginning of the semester, insisted that socialism could never work because no one had any incentive to produce anything. They then cited an anecdotal story about a Texas professor to make their case. The professor in California just shook her head and smiled; anecdote is not the singular form of data.

    The next day the professor announced that the class would be conducted in a socialistic manner: all grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade. The class looked worried but accepted their predicament.

    After the first test the grades were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard were upset, and the students who studied little were happy... temporarily. You see, the professor knew which students had performed poorly and assigned remedial tutoring to those students. Thus, while they had initially performed inadequately, they had to take responsibility for their performance and work harder than they ever had before.

    As the second test rolled around, the students who had done well previously, knowing that an F would tarnish their futures and realizing that their grade might depend on their ability to elevate the scores of their slower classmates, worked extra hard and performed even better on the exam. On the other hand, those students who had previously performed poorly had benefitted from their tutoring sessions and also increased their grade. The average, after the second test, was an A! Even Timmy, who had broken his leg and taken his exam while under the influence of several painkillers, was happy; his grade didn't suffer from his situation and the safety net provided by the tutoring would ensure that he would quickly catch up to his fellow students.

    In the long run ALL of the students benefitted; no one got discouraged and quit, everyone was taught the material so no one dragged down the average, and the tutoring session ensured that students could miss a class to work, look for jobs, or otherwise act in ways that maximized their contribution to society and were beneficial to the greater economy.

    ReplyDelete