2. Does wrong become right if the action is taken for a good cause?
Betty thinks Social Security is a good program. Diane disagrees. “Support” for Social Security is currently mandatory, and Betty is just fine with that. Does Betty have a right to make Diane participate in Social Security against her will?
Whose side are you on, Betty or Diane? Are you willing to use more aggression if you think it’s for a good cause? Or do you think you should have to persuade people to do things your way? Use the slider below to register your views.
Pick 10 or 20% if you want a tax-funded safety net focused only on seniors in dire need.
Pick 30 or 40% if you want a dragnet plan (like Social Security) that includes both the rich and poor.
Pick 50 or 60% if you want to increase taxes to keep Social Security solvent.
Pick 70 or 80% if you want to control how people invest their savings.
Pick 90 or 100% if you want The State to control all savings, investment, and retirement income.
- How many people moved toward persuasion or away from it, and by how much?
- How your Aggression Quotient (A.Q.) compares with the average A.Q for this issue?
- How many people joined the Zero Aggression Project through the Aggression Tracker for this issue?