Fair is unfair

If you ever hear the term, "It's only fair" know that the person has given up on competing in any objective or rational way and is now just a whiny little bitch.  For being fair is the most unfair thing ever created.  Let's take some popular examples always keeping in mind one of my favorite quotes, "If you're ever in agreement with the majority, it's time to pause and reflect"~ Mark Twain

Title IX is the biggest most egregious "fairness" doctrine ever created.  It says that a school has to spend the same amount of money on girls programs as they do on their corresponding boys programs.  That means the University of Alabama would have to devote the same amount of resources and funds for their boys football team than their girls.  Have you ever heard of the women's Alabama football team?  I haven't, but the men are # 1 in the country right now and have one of the most impressive records in the last five years.  So, they shouldn't be slightly more compensated?  Not to mention how many more people want to be a part of the Alabama football team than the girls team, which I'm not even sure exists. Yet, legally, if a group of girls decided they wanted to put on pads and play football, the school would have to let them.  People say, "It's only fair" women and men are equal.  Well, look at television ratings, sure women's football isn't on any of the major networks but there's a reason for that; nobody would watch.  Millions of people tune in each week to watch Alabama. Many more buy tickets and products with the Alabama logo.  Men's college football is a multi-million dollar industry to the point that everyone is complaining the players should get paid.  But if you paid the players, you'd have to pay women's players the same amount.  Even though, the women's players don't bring in any money...if they even exist.
        For those of you that ridiculously claim that if women's football got TV time, they would be just as popular, let's take another college sport; basketball.  I know there's a Duke women's team.  In fact, they're pretty good, I'd say they're around the top 10 teams in the country every year.  But, they don't bring in a fraction of the revenue, fans, jersey and other product sales as the Duke men's team.  You think it's fair to devote the same amount of money to Duke women as it does Duke men?  In what world is that fair? You would need the money you bring in from the men to pay for the women's for an inferior product.
     ESPN celebrated Title IX recently by having a "nine for IX" special.  I personally found it insulting to women that Mary Decker was on it.  Here is a woman who choked in three straight Olympics and has won the same amount of Olympic medals as I have; 0.  You couldn't find nine better athletes than her?  Tells you something about female athletics.
         The most celebrated aspect of Title IX is tennis. Women need to be paid the same winnings as men.  They talk about Billy Jean King beating a pro-male and Serena Williams took a set off Andy Roddick once.  So, a woman only beat a man once and Serena, probably, the best women's tennis player of all time, is celebrated for picking up a set, not a match, a set on a male counterpart.  A female commentator (I think it was Pam Shriver) said during one of Serena's dominant performances, "Get Murray and Djokovic out here, I think she can beat them" her male counterpart said, "Now wait a minute" but she was adamant and he gave up quickly so as not to be accused of being a chauvinist.  Rather than tell you how I think that match would go, I'll let you know what Serena said when asked.  She laughed and said something along the lines of she would only have a chance if Andy Murray was not allowed to serve and Serena got the doubles alley and Murray could only have the single's.  So...why do they get paid the same again?  Maria Sharapova did have a good point when a French player said something along these lines, Sharapova said, "I think more people watch my matches than his."
       Okay, so then I have a solution to make it really fair. If your match generates x million amount of viewers, you get paid x amount whether your male or female.  That would be real objective fairness.

    The other area you see this is in radio.  Interesting you don't see it on TV.  Liberals are arguing that an equal amount of time needs to be assigned to left radio hosts as right.  They are appalled Rush Limbaugh has so many hours on the air.  The reason he does, however, is millions of people are listening for the entire time.  When left radio hosts spout their vile, slanderous, and malicious diarrhea of the mouth, nobody is really tuning in.  That's why they get cancelled, because they don't bring in good ratings and the radio needs to do whatever it can to make sure people are listening.  That's why leftists complain because they can't compete with objective numbers or ratings with right radio hosts so they have to ask the government to force companies to do it since the leftists are incompetent on their own. Bottom line is most people who work for a living hate the government stealing money from their paycheck every day and they don't want to listen to their defenders when they're driving to work.  There would be no gripe if all the radio hosts were left.  How do I know?  Well we do have TV.

     I have never heard anyone talk about the fairness doctrine with TV.  TV is all dominated by the left. The only right leaning show is "Last Man Standing" and they do provide both sides of the issue.  "Modern Family" "Big Bang Theory" every other TV show pretty much is left.  I have no problem with Modern Family being on seemingly every TV channel all day simply because it's hilarious and people watch.  Big Bang Theory is the # 1 comedy.  That may in part be because it's not on a cable channel but it is a very funny show.  How come this idea of "fairness" is never brought up with all the TV shows that are left wing but it is for radio?

The last one I will name is business.  People think that this small company is more efficient and better than the huge corporation but the corporation squashes them.  There has never been a real world example of predatory pricing (selling below cost to drive out the competition) in the history of the world.  There hasn't been because it doesn't work!  Companies stay small or go out of business because they can't innovate and they can't compete in efficiency and quality as their competitors.  One example of this, one man created a website called "Napster" and he completely decimated and obliterated the "Goliath" or "huge corporation that squashes little people" in Virgin records.  Have you seen one lately?  One man, probably in his basement, took out the corporation. Why?  Because he innovated the industry and delivered music much more efficiently than his competitor.  Odd that a few years before that mom and pop music stores complained, "We just can't compete with the corporation"  Yes you could have if you worked hard enough.

Just remember that "fair" is never fair.  The only fairness is found in the invisible hand.  The people that a capitalist society leave behind is a negative externality.  Yes, extremely minimal amount of aid can be given to them to stop them from revolting but it shouldn't be anything that a sane person would be content with.  The only people that should be content are people who just can't offer anything to society. Remember, nobody ever roots for Goliath but Goliath is the one that puts foods on the tables of millions and millions of people by employing them.

Autographed copies of my book The World Hasn't Progressed in 5,000 years can be bought at the bottom of this page