Obama, Will You Please Define “Fair,” Then Stick To It?

Flopping Aces ^ | 05-15-12 | Warren Beatty

[Starman417]

I was, the other day, trying to explain the word "fair" to a friend. Suddenly it occurred to me that I was trying to explain the definition from a statistics perspective, and that was the cause of the miscommunication. In statistics, the word "fair" means that probabilities of occurrence does not change each time an action or process (trial) is conducted. If a process is "fair," then exact probabilities of occurrence can be calculated regardless of initial conditions. We statisticians (besides being weird) understand the word "fair" because it has a very precise, unchanging meaning.

That is the reason why, in a Craps game, "loaded" dice always have the same appearance as regular dice, and that they are slipped into the game only when "serious" money is being wagered and the sucker cannot alter his wagering accordingly. Loaded dice are not fair from a wagering perspective because they alter probabilities of occurrence, thereby increasing the probability that the sucker will lose his wager. Besides, even without loaded dice, craps probabilities favor the person running the game. All he has to do is make the payoff, not welsh, if an individual sucker gets lucky.

That difficulty, the definition of "fair,"occurs quite often. As Jim Yardley said, "'Fair' is one of those warm, fuzzy words that allows the listener to define it to his own personal taste - and the definition changes from one specific case to another."

For example, Obama, during the Democrat Party primary debate, said that he would raise capital gains rates -- not because it would increase revenue, but because it was "fair." During the debate, Obama said, "...I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness." He continued, "...I also want to make sure is that our tax system is fair...."

The "problem" is that Obama did not define, precisely or otherwise, his definition of "fair." As Yardley says, we are left with, in this case, Obama's definition - "and the definition changes from one specific case to another." One thing you will never hear Obama explain is precisely what he means when he uses the word "fair."

In his 2012 State of the Union speech, Obama said, "... or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, and everyone does their fair share...." But nowhere does he define what he means by "fair shot" or "fair share." I guess that he wants us to trust that his definition will be "fair."

[BitWielder1]

His definition of fair is if rich and poor people enter a gambling establishment, no matter what they do in there, when they leave they should all have exactly the same amount of money in their pockets.

In other words: Redistribution.

Why rich people would ever go to such a place eludes me.

[Rapscallion]

If Obama had to stop scapegoating, he would become silent. Scapegoating is his major tactic. Google it : S C A P E G O A T I N G. He blames everybody but himself.

[SES1066]

You cannot define ‘FAIR’ because it is an individually SUBJECTIVE concept that resolves as being a FEELING. We know this and use it in our everyday language when we say things like “that feels fair” when a mutual agreement is reached. When a leader calls things ‘UNFAIR’, it is language manipulation and to be regarded as such. After all, when it can be further described as either ‘slightly’, ‘moderately’ or ‘totally’ unfair, it just goes to show how meaningless this word actually is.

This being said, I predict that the pResident will be saying this word for the next six months!

[Da Bilge Troll]

This is a common topic for me with liberals and they are unable to define it. Fair is in the eye of the beholder which is why it must be enforced by government.

Since government force is the opposite of liberty, "fairness" is also the opposite of liberty.

[ReformationFan]

“Fair” is whenever he or his fellow liberals get their way.

[dfwgator]

"I'll TELL you what's fair, and what's not!"

[ml/nj]

Spare me!

"Fair," always requires a government referee.

ML/NJ

[Intolerant in NJ]

The "problem" is that Obama did not define, precisely or otherwise, his definition of "fair."...that's precisely why Obama and his ilk use words like "fair", "justice", "social" and "equal" - because they are imprecise, difficult to define, and easy to manipulate to mean whatever he and his henchmen want them to mean to try to prove whatever point they're going for - and that's precisely why the US is a country of objectively defined laws, which permit us to render justice and fairness by manifest behavior rather than vague concepts - and that's precisely why Obama hates the Constitution and all that followed.....

[Revolting cat!]

Amen. And that is the reason while the doofus appeals to airheads, and other non-thinking dreamers of vaguely defines utopias.

[Revolting cat!]

Amen. And that is the reason while the doofus appeals to airheads, and other non-thinking dreamers of vaguely defined utopias.