The economic system is as big apart of my life as the chronic medical issues I was born with. Don’t know how your life functions without regards to the economy. It has been easier to get medical intervention on my medical issues, than to get society to make the economy fair. Human behavior is part of life, these abstract systems we create are a direct result of that.
I’m gonna be honest I don’t know what you’re even trying to say, let alone how it relates to my point. I’m talking about “life isn’t fair” usually being a thought terminating cliché and a poor replacement for questioning causes of unfairness. saying “life isn’t fair” in response to any criticism of the system is no more helpful than saying “it is what it is”, which is the quintessential thought terminating cliché.
my point is life isn’t fair could be accurate regarding chronic illness for example, but it isn’t enough to explain the economic burden it brings on you. we might not have the means to prevent a chronic illness, but whatever medical intervention it requires should not be an economic problem for the person. healthcare must—and can—be free.
I don’t think the two of you actually disagree, I think you’re just using the term ‘life’ differently. You’re making the point that there are parts of life that are manmade and subject to change, like the economy which can and should be changed to help people.
Meanwhile they used the phrase ‘life isn’t fair’ in what they’re saying is a descriptive rather than a prescriptive sense. They don’t think of it as a thought terminating cliche and they don’t oppose reform, they just see it as an accurate and realistic outlook for the time being.
The economic system is as big apart of my life as the chronic medical issues I was born with. Don’t know how your life functions without regards to the economy. It has been easier to get medical intervention on my medical issues, than to get society to make the economy fair. Human behavior is part of life, these abstract systems we create are a direct result of that.
I’m gonna be honest I don’t know what you’re even trying to say, let alone how it relates to my point. I’m talking about “life isn’t fair” usually being a thought terminating cliché and a poor replacement for questioning causes of unfairness. saying “life isn’t fair” in response to any criticism of the system is no more helpful than saying “it is what it is”, which is the quintessential thought terminating cliché.
my point is life isn’t fair could be accurate regarding chronic illness for example, but it isn’t enough to explain the economic burden it brings on you. we might not have the means to prevent a chronic illness, but whatever medical intervention it requires should not be an economic problem for the person. healthcare must—and can—be free.
I don’t think the two of you actually disagree, I think you’re just using the term ‘life’ differently. You’re making the point that there are parts of life that are manmade and subject to change, like the economy which can and should be changed to help people. Meanwhile they used the phrase ‘life isn’t fair’ in what they’re saying is a descriptive rather than a prescriptive sense. They don’t think of it as a thought terminating cliche and they don’t oppose reform, they just see it as an accurate and realistic outlook for the time being.