The struggles of perfect distribution

I agree with what the article is saying because I feel that obviously the income isn’t proportionally distributed to individuals even though in the perfect would this would be one of the many goals of society to really make people equal. In addition, the article talks about the marble distribution, which seems a little elementary, however this distribution is very skewed to one side aka the rich people. The whole topic of people with more opportunities beating out the less fortunate is also very significant because I do agree that and it is obviously noticeable especially in the college application process and job market search. 

I have experienced both the benefits and problems associated with group activities because for some situations I feel it’s very hard to equate someone’s performance with another person’s performance.

My experience with the benefits of group activities is on my Econ 203 group project, which ended up in a very equal distribution of tasks and thus made it easier to see who was motivated and did their best work and who didn’t. While everyone got the same grade there’s always an option to talk to the professor if one of my group mates did minimal work. The reason it was a benefit is due to the equal responsibility of each group member and that each member took care of business; enabling a much more productive product. In addition, I feel that this push for equal responsibility is a very good thing because how can an individual be assessed on their part if they didn’t fully contribute to the whole team’s goals. The last reason that this situation worked out was because every group member was asked to give a performance review of each other; holding each individual responsible for their effort, however the group grade as a whole reflects group motivation more than individual motivation.

While I wish that every group activity would have a positive experience sometimes a negative/self-centered approach happens. A time in my life where I have experienced this self-centered approach is when I was doing my on an important science project during my sophomore year of High School. This turned out to have a bad outcome because some of the group mates didn’t actively communicate how much of their part of the project they needed help with. This lack of communication caused a very negative outcome because people were only self-motivated and cared only about their portion of the project or having other individuals finish their part for them. This was very irritating because for someone who tried their best on the project their performance was brought down by the lackluster performance of another individual. In addition, while it was easy to see who hadn’t done their part of the assignment the teacher still gave us the same grade because it was a group project not an individual project, which really aggravated the other 3 individuals who worked hard were punished for another person’s lack of motivation.

While this whole issue of distributing is easy to figure out the hard part is coming up with the appropriate distribution for an individual depending on their effort/motivation. In addition, the article also got me really thinking about morals. This is because I feel like the whole distribution curve is very skewed, which means some individuals are cut out of the benefits while other benefit from outside variables such as: money, and connections. 

So this topic of morals should also be intertwined with income distribution, as seen in the real world, some individuals make questionable or unethical decisions when it comes to opportunities aka opportunism.