• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

"Fair" punishment

What is the best example of fair punishment for a week?

  • Timmy has 2 toys, Tommy has 4 toys. Both boys loose all toys.

    Votes: 21 84.0%

  • Timmy has 2 toys, Tommy has 4 toys. Both boys loose 1 toy.

    Votes: 2 8.0%

  • Timmy has 2 toys, Tommy has 4 toys. Both boys loose 2 toys.

    Votes: 1 4.0%

  • Timmy has 2 toys, Tommy has 4 toys. Both boys loose 50% of their toys.

    Votes: 1 4.0%
  • Total voters
    25
pdog

pdog

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2011
Messages
1,969
Reaction score
1,226
Location
Searching for answers.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I never considered this a complex question until recently. I wanted to put it into generic terms and see what kind of responses I got but do it in terms that was a little less loaded. This is largely a social science question regarding concepts like surplus, deprivation, etc.

This is simply an opinion poll. The boys are the same in each scenario, and you can assume that they misbehaved in the same manner. The number of toys never change. The only thing that changes is the cost of punishment. Choose the one you feel treats both boys with the same degree of punishment and maybe explain why.
 
Last edited:
What???
 
a real fair punishment is an eye for an eye .
 
pdog said:
I never considered this a complex question until recently. I wanted to put it into generic terms and see what kind of responses I got but do it in terms that was a little less loaded.
Click to expand...

Not only is it less loaded, I'd suggest it's a complete blank. Care to ask a question?
 
I don't even know what this is about.
 
Nothing complex about it. This has no relationship to adults. If the children are to deprived of toys, then they are deprived of toys. The purpose in your description is "punishment" - not an exercise in "fairness," capitalism or socialism. It is not a social question at all, it is a parenting question and they're children.
 
pdog said:
I'm not sure what you mean. Can you not see the poll question?
Click to expand...

Yes, everyone can see the poll question, but no one knows why their toys are relevant to the question or what the boys actually did.
 
pdog said:
I never considered this a complex question until recently. I wanted to put it into generic terms and see what kind of responses I got but do it in terms that was a little less loaded.
Click to expand...

I think I know where this is coming from and from what we have seen a punishment is only "fair" when it only impacts wealthy white people. Any punishment that negatively impacts a poor person, a person of color, or a person of a gender other than male is, by its very nature, unfair.

For example, a kid shoots a couple of people and they rough him up a little in the process of capturing him. That kid is the victim of police brutality if he's black and a simple scumbucket if he's white.

Scumbucket
550b0d72a3da2_zps8dd2e2f4.jpg

Victim of police brutality
n-FERGUSON-large570.jpg

People of financial means must have penalties assessed based on their ability to pay. It's only fair, for example, that someone doing 37 in a 35mph zone who makes $250k/yr be fined $30,000 while someone else doing 75 in a 35mph zone who only makes $25k/yr be assessed $1.35. You have to remember, it isn't the infraction that we're punishing, it's the theft of labor and opportunity that the wealthy impose on the poor that must be atoned for.
 
joko104 said:
Nothing complex about it. This has no relationship to adults. If the children are to deprived of toys, then they are deprived of toys. The purpose in your description is "punishment" - not an exercise in "fairness," capitalism or socialism. It is not a social question at all, it is a parenting question and they're children.
Click to expand...

I'm not asking about capitalism or socialism. What made you pick the answer you did?
 
pdog said:
I never considered this a complex question until recently. I wanted to put it into generic terms and see what kind of responses I got but do it in terms that was a little less loaded. This is largely a social science question regarding concepts like surplus, deprivation, etc.

This is simply an opinion poll. The boys are the same in each scenario, and you can assume that they misbehaved in the same manner. The number of toys never change. The only thing that changes is the cost of punishment. Choose the one you feel treats both boys with the same degree of punishment and maybe explain why.
Click to expand...

it depends on the situation.what did they do ?
 
Lutherf said:
I think I know where this is coming from and from what we have seen a punishment is only "fair" when it only impacts wealthy white people.
Click to expand...


I don't care about any of this right now. I'm interested in one particular facet, particularly the severity relative to the punishee. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
pdog said:
The exact same thing. That is all that I'll say.
Click to expand...

I know but I need to learn what exactly caused them to be punished.did they stop studying their lessons ? did they steal something from another person's bag ? did they insist on eating chocolate instead of brocoli? you see the type of punishment may change according to the context especially when these are kids.its not that simple if its about kids
 
pdog said:
I never considered this a complex question until recently. I wanted to put it into generic terms and see what kind of responses I got but do it in terms that was a little less loaded. This is largely a social science question regarding concepts like surplus, deprivation, etc.

This is simply an opinion poll. The boys are the same in each scenario, and you can assume that they misbehaved in the same manner. The number of toys never change. The only thing that changes is the cost of punishment. Choose the one you feel treats both boys with the same degree of punishment and maybe explain why.
Click to expand...
I sense that you're trying to engineer a desired response by being vague, but you're being too vague to the point that it's not even a question.
 
Medusa said:
I know but I need to learn what exactly caused them to be punished.did they stop studying their lessons ? did they steal something from another person's bag ? did they insist on eating chocolate instead of brocoli? you see the type of punishment may change according to the context especially when these are kids.its not that simple if its about kids
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the question revolves around the wealthy paying the same amount for violations such as speeding.
 
Since Tommy has 4 toys and Timmy only has 2 then the only fair thing would be to have Tommy give Timmy one of his toys so that both have 3. In that way Tommy will feel the sting of the righteous hand of justice and Timmy will be less inclined to misbehave because he is now on the same socioeconomic level as Tommy.

While it would appear at first glance that taking all toys away from both boys would achieve the same result this would be false. To exercise that option would be to ignore the social benefits of "restorative justice".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom