Fair
March 13, 2009
One thing I like about being around hoards of six- to eight-year-old people for hours on end is that I get to see some more obvious cases of human nature being manifest. Case in point, making teams for a game of football.
There are eight boys that are dividing up into teams. Four of them (the Reds) are wearing jerseys that bear the name of the athletic flavor of the week. The other four (the Blues) are trying to figure out the rules. Johnny Red is interested in winning and looking like a star in the process. Timmy Red is interested in playing a fun game. Johnny and Timmy end up getting into an argument that sounds something like this:
Johnny: Four (Reds) against four (Blues). That’s fair.
Timmy: No. (Looking at the Blues and trying not to hurt their feelings.) It’s not fair to have the best players on the same team.
Johnny: In football you have the same amount of players on both sides. If both sides have the same number of players, it is fair.
Timmy: No, it’s not. Let’s re-pick.
Johnny: You’re just afraid.
Timmy: I am not.
Johnny: Fine. You go be on their team. Three against five and we’ll still beat you.
Timmy: But that still isn’t fair!
Johnny: I know. Your team will have more than our team. It’s not fair to us, but we don’t mind.
Timmy: Fine.
When Mrs. Whatserface calls the class in Johnny celebrates a 49 – 0 victory with the other three Reds, while Timmy tries not to be labeled as a Blue. “The teams weren’t fair,” he mutters under his breath.
I suppose every teacher has a discussion about what the word “fair” means. There is the comparison between the difference between “fair” and “equal.” Simon gets rewarded for turning in his homework while Peter does not. It isn’t equal, but it is fair because Simon has ADHD and only sees his single parent on weekends. Peter gets the blue ribbon at the science fair that Simon cannot attend. As a teacher, it is hard to figure out what is fair, because every teacher wants each student to advance one step every day. The meaning of “step” differs with every student. We might not be good at it all the time, but I like to think that it is our aim.
I watched a bleeding-heart, left-wing, propagandist, liberal, [insert Hannity-esque adjective] documentary recently about water. It showed how water has become one of the hottest commodities on the market. Water is the source of life, and whoever controls the source of life, controls life itself (an exaggeration, to be sure, but a valid thought). In third-world countries, human beings cannot afford to drink treated water. Why not? Because the companies have decided that water can be owned.
Yes, companies that treat the water should be compensated for doing so. However, the documentary points out that the bottom line cost for treated water is equal to about two dollars per person per year. Citizens of third world countries that cannot afford water cannot afford the mark-up. The Corporations that sell the water sell them to third-world country citizens at the same price that they charge Americans. Much of the water that Americans drink (in bottled water, soft drinks, etc.) comes from third-world countries. They have to drink from rivers into which their own waste is dumped, but we get to drink the treated water from their aquifers. Why are we so lucky? Because we can afford to be.
In the end, everyone pays the same amount for the same product. It is fair. Right?