What if the common knowledge is at odds with the actual objective truth though?
Here we go!
Good point Pman; but a problem arises in the determination of *objective* truth, when subjective preferences come into play.
In the current Statist/Individual Rights scenario, the Statist are betting the motivational farm that it is more moral and more practical for a majority of the society to create laws which empower the State to seize - through tax/"spread the wealth around" policy - the free market earnings of individuals who EXCELL in the productive enterprise...in order to make goods and services available to them who aren't productive. Personal merit...nws.
Now some (subjectively) see such a Marxist ideology as being a 'common sense' approach and having a moral impetus as well....while others see such as immoral, and practically insane, as such policy subsidizes unproductivity (instead of punishing it) and punishes productivity instead of rewarding it. Democratic processes nws.
Of course, the ideal would be a State that punished unproductivity and rewarded productivity as a moral/civic duty to all who enjoy the rewards of a group of productive individuals. The individual who bought into that social contract of civic responsibility would then be guaranteed the basics...with rewards and frills based on merit and extraordinary productivity. It seems that this is exactly what the Free Market accomplishes; though I doubt that the *Free Market* even exist any more.
There are abuses at the top and the bottom of merit-based economics. Some people will always figure out ways to game the system. Punishment for them, is the best we can do to discourage such.
It's a jungle out there!