What if people received their rewards in other ways?
What could they be?
We probably can agree that no two people have exactly the same abilities or interests. But why do we reward some more generously than others? Could it be that we have been led to believe that some talents are more valuable to our survival than others? If that were true then a general would make more money than a professional football star. A nuclear scientist would out earn a Rock Star.
If we are going to replace our present unbalanced system for one that better serves all people, we need to talk about what it is that is at the root of our unequal governments. Why do some people always rise to positions of wealth and control?
Maybe it's because we measure success by wealth and control.
Are there other ways of rewarding our members?
Do we have to decide that some types of work are more valuable than others?
A classless society would not be one in which all members are equal. But it would be one in which all members are equally important parts of the whole.
If I say that my role as a rehabilitation teacher is equal to my neighbor, who is a cabinet maker, or my other neighbor who is a Boeing engineer, and they agree that they are as equal as I am to our society, then why would we reward the Boeing engineer twice what the cabinet maker or the rehabilitation teacher makes?
Why do some folks receive gratification through the work they perform, while others can only be gratified by the wealth they amass? If we removed wealth as a reward, what would these people turn to for gratification?
To my way of thinking, members of a classless society would receive their compensation through their work. Through their contributions to the community.
Carl Jarvis
No comments:
Post a Comment