It is in line with socialist fairness and justice not to suffer from poverty and inequality.

It is not accurate to simply understand that "all" are average. What needs to be pointed out in particular is that "all" here is not a simple average, and distribution according to work is to get one's due share under a fair distribution system.

Paying the fruits of labor, but having the same reward as lazy people, will dampen people's enthusiasm.

More work and more gains, less work and less gains. This is a kind of psychology calling for social fairness and justice.

From the Analects of Confucius, we are not worried about the amount of wealth, but about the uneven distribution of wealth; From the psychological point of view, there may be a perfect psychology and a single defense mechanism. Self-superego is above the object superego and pursues absoluteness!

The phrase "not suffering from widowhood but suffering from inequality" comes from the Analects of Confucius, which means that when distributing wealth, we are not afraid of how much wealth we have, but we are afraid of uneven and unfair distribution. From the point of view of pure linguistics and simple distribution, this sentence is very reasonable. But on the whole, such a single truth is not feasible.

First of all, it should be clear that "average" and "uneven" are conditional. "Jun" means that you can only be "Jun" under the same conditions and results, but you can't be "Jun" under different conditions and results.

Let's talk about the same conditions first. For example, all the workers are doing the same job and under the same conditions, and the two can be compared. If the conditions are different, the two cannot be compared. For example, a worker and a senior engineer are both engaged in industry, but the conditions are different and cannot be compared. For another example, an ordinary farmer farmed and scientist Yuan Longping farmed, but the two conditions are different and cannot be compared.

Let's talk about the result first. Making nuclear bombs is an industry, and so is making hoes. Can you say that the results are all the same? For the same farming, the yield per mu in Yuan Longping is 2,000 Jin, and the yield per mu of farmers is 1000 Jin. Can you say the result is the same?

So the word "average" is conditional. It is precisely because of different conditions and different results that only the same conditions and the same results can be achieved in the distribution of wealth. Different conditions and different results, we can't "all". Can you make engineers who make nuclear bombs get the same salary as workers who make hoes? Can Yuan Longping be treated like a farmer?

It is a kind of fairly clever psychology, always thinking that everything is fair and everyone can start to act at a starting line. This kind of person lacks enthusiasm and courage, and is basically step by step. Of course, such people also complain about social injustice, and some complain about the psychological state of others.

Opposing oppression and demanding equality has always been the correct slogan of the ancient people in China. If he is an unequal concept, then I think it is no problem to wait for equality. In today's society, the understanding of equality between the rich and the poor should be to encourage everyone to work hard under equal conditions and get rich together, rather than blindly causing dependent thoughts and distorted psychology. Explain that society is not afraid of poverty and things, but is afraid of inequality or inequality.

In today's words, more points and less points are ok, but the distribution must be fair. Usually people don't want to be treated unfairly. Good for evil and sacrificing yourself to help others need to achieve a higher level of accomplishment.

If you don't suffer from poverty, you can accept that others get the same reward as your own efforts, but you can't accept that the same efforts can't be rewarded accordingly. This kind of psychology is a beautiful vision of absolute fairness, but it is still unrealistic at present. We know that the society is very complex, and we need a lot of things such as capital and connections in the society, and the allocation of resources in the society will tend to people with more capital and connections, which will lead to unfair distribution and produce this kind of psychology.

Hatred is not treated fairly. Expectations are ignored and not respected.

The inequality here is considered unfair. As for what is unfair, it should be included in the national laws and moral rules to make judgments. It's an upright man is open and poised's frankness.

What kind of psychology is it not to suffer from wealth or inequality?

First of all, your question is contradictory. You don't suffer from wealth, but also from inequality.

What does this mean? Can you understand? It means: I'm not worried about less points, but about unfair distribution, not about people living in poverty, but about unstable life. In other words, if you are not worried about whether you are rich or poor, then what are you worried about? Because the rich and the poor are themselves unequal, do you understand this? So your question is inconsistent.

Actually, people are all the same. If others are widowed like you, they are widowed. If there are more people than you, you will suffer inequality; If others are widowed than you, there will be no pain of widowhood or inequality. This is human nature and cannot be changed.