Common misinterpretations

Common misinterpretations


**Please note:** * If this post declares something as a fact proof is required. * The title must be descriptive * No text is allowed on images * Common/recent reposts are not allowed *See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for more information.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*


*reading comments* “🍿🍿🍿”


Mind if I join you? 🍿🍿☕️






Hey thanks for holding a seat 🍿🍻


Me too 🍆


🐛🐙 💃🏃💃🏃


Ditto 🍑




I'm sorry, but popcorn and coffee?


Mind your own business.




How novel


Oh yes bring on ze popcorn this is fun 🍿 🍿 🍿


ITT: People don't understand that an analogies are never intended to match real life in all possible ways, but often used to demonstrate just a single aspect.


Twist: in all these cases, the child migrant worker is being paid $.01 per apple.




No no that ones called capitalism


They fucking wish they were getting that much for an apple


I mean that can easily be quite a good paycheck


just go around the fucking tree, dumbass


I can't I tripped on my bootstraps


If you pull up on them hard enough, you can levitate up into the tree.


The other side of the tree is on private property and he's gonna get shot for trespassing.


This is where the metaphor comes into its own.


The other guy owns that half of the tree, like his parents before him


Holy shit I laughed way longer at this than I should've


Police would knock him down and kneel on his neck if he tried...


This is a good metaphor. Take the US for example. Golden land of opportunities a decade ago. Look at it now, too many people went to that side of the tree, now all the apples are gone and no body has enough.


Ah yes, the USA pre-2011, FAMOUSLY without any inequality.


> Golden land of opportunities a decade ago. Look at it now, too many people went to that side of the tree, now all the apples are gone and no body has enough. Go ahead and elaborate. What exactly has changed in the last decade and why?


Hold up. The US isn't in the state they are in because too many people came into it in the last decade or two. It's because with the election of Obama the republican party stopped trying to run a country and only obstructed everything the Dems wanted to do. Then that tumplefuck got voted in and hurt the country as much as he could. It has nothing to do with people coming to 'your side of the tree',but with half of you trying to burn you side and selling the ashes to the highest bidder


It started a lot earlier than that. Go read some history books about Reaganomics, and realize that that wasn't even the beginning. Nixon was doing stupid shit in the 70s, and he wasn't even the beginning. Politicians have been fucking over whatever country they are elected in since we started electing politicians. Why do you think Julius Ceaser was stabbed? (hint, they were politicians)


Or climb tree Or build your own fucking ladder Or plant apple seeds Don't reward lazy fucks


Tree is protected, can't climb it without getting shot by your cops Build ladder... but where do you get the wood, nails, hammer and saw? Plant apple seeds from where? Water it how? And what will you eat in the 20 years it takes to mature enough to bear fruit? People like you probably look at homeless/jobless people and tell them "get a job!". You don't realise that jobs and homes are like clothes - if you don't have them already, it's infinitely harder to get them...


people like you prolly don’t realize the vast majority of homeless people are extreme addicts, and many choose to live on the street/will deny assistance


>Don't reward lazy fucks But it's the people doing nothing in the original scenario that get rewarded?


Time spent building a ladder is time other people spend collecting easy apples. Moreso for *waiting for a new tree to grow from a seed.*


Ah yes, an innocuous cartoon that definitely won't strike at the very heart of political division in the West.


Ah yes


_Real_ justice would be to tie knives to that Giving Tree. It's time for payback...


It is now the Taking Tree


starring Vin Diesel and becoming ecologically relevant in a theatre near you Summer 2022


that would be vengeance which does not equal to justice


The Giving Tree: cảm ơn


I just for the first time saw that as a potential pun on the English "Come on." Cảm ơn rất nhiều!




Now that will be in my head all day. Again.


Reality: other kid stabs the other and gets all the apples for himself


Fucking apple hogger.


Reality: other kid gets on the same level as the kid getting the apples by moving his ladder to the same side.


Actual Reality: the other kid and his family were arrested for entering another property/country and are now sitting in a cell


Wow, how do I get myself born to a rich family?




No no, it would be vilified migrant workers picking the apples and everyone else would be posting wokeness on social media


More like immigrants doing all the picking and the bosses who are displayed as picking in the photos


Man justice looks complicated as hell


I like the justice one as there is an extra layer, that is, one side has to pull it towards them to create it but the other side has to shore it up to stop it going back.


Here is the real question, who is making all of this and how are you are making sure that person is getting justice?


A "non" profit organization like the brilliant scam on some chocolate bars.


I wonder how many people would chop down the tree entirely in service of justice


Exactly. People have this idealised idea that achieving equity would entail getting everyone on the same level by giving more resources to those that need it. But every time it's been attempted before it quickly resorts to taking everything away from everyone. And just like magic, you got your equity. This is the reality https://imgur.com/a/qL1o2hD


Ah, yes. Every country that implemented social safety nets has famously collapsed a few years afterwards.


Yes, I live in one of those countries and thanks to our social safety net I don't have a smart phone and can not access Reddit.


*le irony*


Social safety nets have nothing to do with racism/sexism in the name of "equity".


THERE! Now we're all equally fucked!


Life isn't equal except in death. Let's not aspire to equity of suffering _again_. ^^^^. ^^^^FFS ^^^^not ^^^^being ^^^^literal


Of course, for an issue with easily scientifically verifiable consequences, let’s trust some redditor’s bullshit “logic” over actual research. In the world of fact rather than conspiracy, we know that wealth redistribution and lesser economic inequality has *tons* of positive effects: “Using statistics from 23 developed countries and the 50 states of the US, British researchers Richard G. Wilkinson and Kate Pickett show a correlation between income inequality and higher rates of health and social problems (obesity, mental illness, homicides, teenage births, incarceration, child conflict, drug use), and lower rates of social goods (life expectancy, educational performance, trust among strangers, women's status, social mobility, even numbers of patents issued per capita), on the other.[51] The authors argue inequality leads to the social ills through the psychosocial stress, status anxiety it creates.[52] A 2011 report by the International Monetary Fund by Andrew G. Berg and Jonathan D. Ostry found a strong association between lower levels of inequality and sustained periods of economic growth. Developing countries (such as Brazil, Cameroon, Jordan) with high inequality have "succeeded in initiating growth at high rates for a few years" but "longer growth spells are robustly associated with more equality in the income distribution."[53][54][55] The Industrial Revolution led to increasing inequality among nations. Some economies took off, whereas others, like many of those in Africa or Asia, remained close to a subsistence standard of living. General calculations show that the 17 countries of the world with the most-developed economies had, on average, 2.4 times the GDP per capita of the world’s poorest economies in 1870. By 1960, the most developed economies had 4.2 times the GDP per capita of the poorest economies.[56] Regarding to GDP indicator, GDP has nothing to say about the level of inequality in society. GDP per capita is only an average. When GDP per capita rises by 5%, it could mean that GDP for everyone in the society has risen by 5%, or that GDP of some groups has risen by more while that of others has risen by less—or even declined.” From the Wikipedia page for wealth redistribution And that is the entirety of the research segment by the way, I’m not selectively quoting out the studies that found this not to be the case: there are no listed counters or studies that found *any* negative effects of wealth redistribution. So, it continually blows my mind that I have to keep reiterating this but: **if there is easily available scientific information about the issue in question, do not give your opinion on the matter instead, because it is fucking worthless**


Not that I’m against redistribution, but correlation, and even strong correlation, doesnt mean those improvements are an effect of wealth redistribution. It’s very difficult to claim causation in the social sciences


This is very true, and a very good point. I am certain that, at least in part, these results are biased by the fact that states that redistribute wealth tend to be more left-wing and therefore support policies like rehabilitative prisons which reduce crime - instead of it being the wealth distribution that made a difference. Thank you for pointing this out. That said, I believe it is fair to say that the benefits surpass simple correlation and are themselves factors for a lot of these: it is scientific fact that people experience stress due to their economic situation relative to others and *lots* of stress due to the strains of poverty; stress makes people more likely to commit crimes and take unhealthy life choices (e.g taking up smoking or binge drinking) therefore it stands to reason that reducing economic inequality and making the poorest richer with money taken from the rich should on its own reduce rates of these behaviours. This is just one example of how wealth redistribution can independently impact the things listed


In my opinion, the causes of crime and unhealthy life choices are poverty itself, not wealth inequality inherently. The question then becomes how does the state alleviate that poverty, and redistributing wealth is a very good and popular answer. It’s an important distinction because I’m sure you could find some very poor countries or some historical data with a high crime rate and little wealth inequality and use that as a counter example to the studies you listed. And if poverty is the root cause instead of wealth inequality we leave ourselves open to other policy ideas as well, such as the rehabilitative prisons you mentioned.


This is not interesting as fuck.


Who upvotes this garbage? This is something I’d see on Facebook.


Start reading comments




This is a representation of terrible


Represent *this! (*Grabs crotch)


There came a time when I had to ask myself: Did I even want to be a 3? Or did I just hate myself for being a 2? I don’t know. All I know is: I sure do love them apples!


See, the problem is, equality of opportunity is absolutely an achievable goal, and sets up the most people to do the most good. Equality of *outcome* is impossible to enact without screwing a lot of people. Don't let this idealistic garbage pitch lies to you, because that's exactly what they are.


Anyone else read this in Jordan Peterson's voice?


Fact and sanity? Sir, this is reddit, pls move on


Remember: whenever you hear the (now very trendy) term 'equity,' it always means 'equality of outcomes'


Equity is not equality of outcome; it is there to help with further inequality that just giving everyone the same toys doesn't address. Say we have two children: one comes from a wealthy household and has always had their parents arround to read to them and help them with homework and other things. The other comes from an impoverished background raised by a single parent and doesn't have much time to work or play with their parent and hasn't be assisted reading. Now both are given the same tools when they come to school because so far our imaginary society has achieved equality (which I believe most societies today are yet to do). However, the child from the impoverished household has worse scores and results that the more wealthy child. Equity would be providing the impoverished child with things the wealthy child might get but the impoverished wouldn't have. For example, more books and extra tutoring, enabling them to become equal with the wealthy child and in later life having equal opportunities. ( u/OfficerDarrenWilson this is what equity means.) Sorry for the extra posts, I have been having WiFi problems.


But that's already the standard for Western societies because social welfare is often means tested. Equality according the graphic would translate as flat supports that anyone can make use of. But it's a myth that this is the society we live in. You can't get unemployment insurance if you're employed (although UBI would change that). You can't get food stamps if you're wealthy. Most people who use graphics like these to talk for the need for equity are people who ignore the existing sweeping equity in Western societies.


Having some equity-based policies existing doesn’t mean we can call society equitable, there’s more which needs to be done.


I assume it's a call for better and more widely implemented equity. I can't speak for everyone who uses this graphic because it differs from country to country. Though I can say UBI is a good idea.


But in context 'equity' always refers to equality of outcomes between races, and never anything else. It pointedly hardly ever refers to class, and always to race (or other identity)


>Equality? Just move the ladder bitch


This comment section does not pass the vibe check


We are all comrades this blessed day


Justice seems a lot like "our apple tree"...


An apple tree ransacked so tragically that it never bears fruit again lol.


I don’t like apples. I like oranges. Why aren’t there any oranges.


Traditionally, that's never been a fair comparison


This injustice must be addressed by enslaving apple fans.


Take your hard earned apple earnings, build the orange infrastructure, supply oranges, have orange infrastructure taken from you and nationalised. Justice.


I shouldn't have to go all the way out to that tree, I've got 3 kids with cancer and fuel is expensive and I don't even have an apple peeler, so really you should drop it off to me and pay me for taking it.


I see what they were going for but I'm not sure it's particularly well executed. Inequality seems to be exemplified by both parties standing around doing nothing, but one of them got lucky and an apple fell in his lap. Also, equity and justice seem to be mutually exclusive. In this case, if you implemented equity and gave the kid on the right the bigger ladder and then implemented justice so the apples were equal on both sides of the tree, then the kid on the right now has an advantage because his bigger ladder let's him harvest apples from further up the tree. So you end up right back at inequality.


> Also, equity and justice seem to be mutually exclusive. In this case, if you implemented equity and gave the kid on the right the bigger ladder and then implemented justice so the apples were equal on both sides of the tree, then the kid on the right now has an advantage because his bigger ladder let's him harvest apples from further up the tree. So you end up right back at inequality. Which is why it clearly doesn't recommend this approach? It is identifying equity as a way to use tools to solve a situation that is already unjust, and then saying the justice would be addressing and removing that unfair situation to begin with. It's not saying you should do both.




But in this case it would be true. If I give women special treatment when studying STEM and then remove the reason why they needed the special treatment in the first place, the system would be rigged in their favor.


Yeah, that's why in the depiction of justice the kids have the same ladder.


Easy. Redefine justice while moving goalposts.


It's so terrible that only the weak minds of reddit will swallow it.


And they vote IRL


Controversial: what if the person on the right just isn't very good at picking apples?


No no no, that can only be if people are different. But obviously every human is an equally identical clone and society is the thing that changes based on which equally identical human is interacting with it. DUH.


Nonsense, we are all completely identical on this planet.


Well the point is that the person has equal access to opportunity. From there, it's the person's responsibility to work hard / be competent. They're not being "spoon-fed" the apples. That's how I interpret the metaphor at least.


It shouldn’t be a competition to see who can possess the most apples


This 'guide' is so fucking stupid. "Equality of opportunity bad, equality of outcome good"


Where do you get that from? At no point does it show an equal outcome. It never shows you how many apples are picked by each person or what’s in their basket. It just shows that what is thought of as equality of opportunity isn’t necessarily so.


What? All of these except the last one have unequal opportunities.... So yeah, Equality of opportunity is the point, if someone **then** still doesnt pick apples at all, it is their own fault.


While I did find the guide stupid, it's clearly a call for equality off opportunity, not equality of outcome.


How's it say that. The amount of apples they pick is still based off of how hard they're working


Equality is the best one for government to do.


And then there's REALITY


whos gonna tell them Equity isn't a realistic goal and every time its been implemented its backfired horribly?


I dunno what you think reasonable accommodations for disabled people are, but hint, its that. The ones implemented in most countries just fine.


I think the Soviets perfected Equity and the Chinese Justice. Just ask the +100M who definitely did not die.


I'll adjust this for you. Inequality as pictured is somewhat incorrect. This is more like luck. Inequality is if one kid has a ladder and the other does not. Equality is if both kids have ladders and equal access to the tree. If the kid on the right doesn't climb the ladder and pick apples, he gets no apples. Equity is when the kid on the left picks apples all day while the kid on the right takes a nap, and then an adult comes along, takes apples from the hardworking kid and gives them to the lazy one. Justice is when the lazy kid starves, because in real life there is no reward without effort. Take your nonsense over to /r/antiwork, you'll be welcome there


Thank God somebody set it straight. Kudos.


yeah, in real life there is no reward without effort kim kardashian was just a collective delirium


Equity is not equality of outcome; it is there to help with further inequality that just giving everyone the same toys doesn't address. Say we have two children: one comes from a wealthy household and has always had their parents arround to read to them and help them with homework and other things. The other comes from an impoverished background raised by a single parent and doesn't have much time to work or play with their parent and hasn't be assisted reading. Now both are given the same tools when they come to school because so far our imaginary society has achieved equality (which I believe most societies today are yet to do). However, the child from the impoverished household has worse scores and results that the more wealthy child. Equity would be providing the impoverished child with things the wealthy child might get but the impoverished wouldn't have. For example, more books and extra tutoring, enabling them to become equal with the wealthy child and in later life having equal opportunities.


Agree with everything except Equity, it isn't laziness, its the kids background, say the kid on the right was disabled a ladder wouldnt help him at all, equity is when the disabled kid has some kind of a prosthetic which would help him climb said ladder


Or just a big tree shaker. People scramble for apples. Feels more like how the world works


Equality is the only moral one OwO. Anyone who advocates for the rest are morons and should get helicopter rides


To bad justice will kill the tree in this picture.


What about those who choose not to climb the ladder?


Well then let natural selection take care of them at that point.


But in reality they would complain about the fact that the person who is climbing the ladder not picking 2 apples and sharing 1 with them because they are greedy.


In reality a company would buy that tree and patent the seeds and sue anyone who tried to have an apple that didn't come from them.


Luckily, the vast majority of apple-less people are just simply asking for a ladder. You'll always have a few people with ladders, unwilling to climb, but it's better to leave them be and focus on the ones ready to climb, that just need the ladder.


If as a collective we have an incredible surplus of apples from the ever increasing productivity of ladder climbers, we can choose to not let ladder climbing be a life or death proposition by providing everyone with some bare minimum of apples. That way people can be truly free to decide if they wish to spend their one and only life climbing ladders, or doing something else that may or may not produce apples That was kinda fun


What’s the incentive for people to continue to pick apples if not picking apples gets you the same apples as people who make the effort to pick them?


you do understand this is literally how we got civilisation, science, development? Farmers started producing a surplus of grain, which allowed others to do things other than subsistence farming, like creating tools to make processes more efficient, building more than just a hut yourself, learning, science, medicine, art, ... Many of those things didnt produce something that paid off right away, it just gave humans a chance to longterm advance humanity instead of racing from day to day to have food tomorrow


They didn't say equal apples though. They said a bare minimum from the surplus. Let's face it, the "ladder climbers" we are really talking about don't even climb ladders any more. They inherited so many apples from their parents that the apples themselves magically produce more apples than that person will ever be able to eat. So then they invest their apples badly and lose all of them, forcing the actual ladder climbers to replenish their embarrassingly huge hoard of apples.


I like the way you apple


I don’t know if it would give you the same level, I want everyone provided with a good amount of apples. If someone wants to spend their time picking extra apples on top of that then they should go for it, I just don’t want people to starve to death if they can’t or even don’t want to pick apples Besides, I don’t think we need to incentivize apple picking much anymore. Plenty of people will wish to do so of their own accord naturally, and we are near the point of automating a lot of apple picking which could eliminate the issue (provided the literal fruits of that automation go to everyone, not just those who own the robots and the apple orchard)


Lets not forget that you can't fit an infinite amount of ladders around the tree aka there aren't enough well paying jobs for everyone. Do those people deserve less because there isn't enough room for them? Or the people that can't climb ladders. Do they deserve to suffer because of something they have no control over? If you can look at someone down on their luck and think they don't deserve my help then you're probably a sociopath. Which I think is what's happening to people. We've literally trained people to be sociopathic. How else can you describe telling someone they deserve to suffer simply because they couldn't get enough.


Does this apply to sports? Cause I want to see short Jewish guys playing in the NBA just because they are underrepresented. It doesn't matter if they get dunked on all the time and never score we should just be happy the NBA is more inclusive! Edit: I don't get the downvoters. Short Jews will bring a different perspective and dynamic. No its not quantifiable and they often look incompetent but trust us, we are all better off for it. Sorry but my kids surgeon is more important than basketball man so I want her to have the best quality person I can. I don't see how you can argue for no affirmative action for sports but not for occupations that lives depend on.


You forgot midgets. NBA should be more inclusive!


The downvotes are probably because the people who want affirmative action only want it in specific scenarios. Also they seem to have a problem with jewish people.


● Affirmative racism


But an hour of work is an hour of work. Give the homeless the chance to operate or pay the surgeon in socks Equity


This is a meme based on opinion. It's not interesting.


I don't think I've seen a meme not based on opinion.


Want to enjoy the fruits of your labor? Get off your damn ass and move your ladder instead of killing the fucking economic tree so everyone starves.


Attack the tree get a beating Justice


More bullshit. Get off your ass and walk to the other side of the tree.


So, poor people who have been historically disenfranchised should just ... do what?


Pull the bootstraps harder, duh! Pay no attention to the intergenerational wealth gaps, and the redlining, and mass incarceration, and...


[Related (with some different themes)](https://i.redd.it/rryhiax6wkm11.jpg)


Some people get their understanding of economics from childrens books....


some people get theirs from elon musk, to each their own haha


Yeah... why don't poor people *choose* to leave in rich communities? It *has to be* because they actually enjoy inequality (and want the rich people to feel bad for them) /massive_sarcasm


You know it’s a metaphor right?


So was their comment


Yeah but it isn’t as easy as that. “Go over there and get a $100,000/year job”


Because most people don't have anything to offer the world that's worth $100,000 to other people - and many of them hate those who do have something so valuable to offer.


they were being hyperbolic....


except it's not as easy as going around so they missed the point.....


This kills the tree


Reality cut down the tree


Sounds good in theory. You can't fix the tree part in most real life situations, so it's mostly going to be a mix of 1 to 3.


i am for equality


the picture itself is flawed to demonstrate these concepts accurately.


Don't stand on the top of a ladder, ya moron. Somebody's gonna get hurt


There are an infinite number of ways to group humans into categories in which inequalities exist.


Theres a distinct lack of corpses here


Great book - The Giving tree by Shel Silverstein. Real tear-jerker. 10/10 would recommend.


Yeah... I remember thinking it was a great book when I was younger. But reading it again, it's actually pretty messed up. It's a tale about a terribly one-sided relationship. Honestly, a pretty bad example for either party of such a relationship except *perhaps* if you compare the tree to a parent. Even then, it's a pretty sad story because the child does nothing but take advantage of the tree and generally ignore it and cannibalize it until the very end.


I've not read the book (I'm not US) and just read the wiki page on it. But isn't the point of a story to tell a story and perhaps provoke discussion and not to 'set a good example'? My son (6YO) is super into nature and eco stuff atm, I think if I read him this book he'd feel sad for the tree.


Yeah, no shit. It’s a warning.


Yay, more horseshit political memes propping up the democrat party agenda. I wonder if any subreddits will be untouched by november


So, the only way to be fair is to fix what occurs naturally?


Do you think everything that occurs naturally is inherently good? Disease, famine, drought, floods, death, murder, rape, etc are all naturally occurring phenomenon. Are they good? Didnt think so. So yes, sometimes what is good, decent, fair, or right is something taken from nature and "fixed"


Depends what you mean by naturally


What would you propose it means?




That’s because it is and Reddit it eats it up as fucking normal


Because communism good my dude


You do not strengthen the weak, by weakening the strong.




Stand on the other side of the tree? Seems like an easy fix


Yeah, sometimes you have to move your ass to get what you want in this world.


“Yeah, just move out of your impoverished and socially unstable community and get yourself a job that pays $1B a year. It’s easy, really”


Reality: the kid on the right doesn’t want to climb the ladder, it’s too much work, besides the kid on the left has enough apples for the both of them...


As others pointed out, the inequality section points out another facet of this line of thought: inequality via poor decisions (i.e: just go to the more fruitful side of the tree). Serving the less-fortunate is wonderful, but you need to be careful that you're not rewarding someone who made bad decisions. A part of life is learning how to make good decisions the hard way, and if you take that away by rewarding people who don't work to get themselves out of bad situations... People don't learn. Part 2: And as for equity, which has become a more common term lately: the issue is that, when the seasons change and the other side becomes more fruitful, the equity that gave the less-fortunate easier access becomes descrimatory towards the previously more-fortunate. (i.e: the previously less-fortunate have become the more-fortunate because the situation changed naturally, and they are still benefiting artificially)


After equality, it gets super complicated. Cute little graphics don't do it justice. Most programs that try to customize help for certain people in certain ways are a complete shit show. But we don't need to worry about that, cause we aren't even near the equality stage.




Equity = Socialism


Justice = marxism Everyone gets the exact same tools and the system is constructed so that each person gets the same amount of resources regardless of who they are with those same tools. But in practice, its a different story...


I see equal opportunities unless we really believe the apples only drop on people based on skin color or some crap. Same size ladders teaches people to use what they have instead of bitching what they don't have. It reflects What is wrong with society. We give ladders to people so they can feed themselves then they sit around and complain they need a teller ladder instead of moving it.


So many people completely triggered by a fucking Shel Silverstein meme 😂


"I just want my damn apples!"


Nobody seems to remember The Giving Tree.