EPTOn February 28 2014 08:00 oneofthem wrote:
this one it seems. pretty hard to understand him with the french accent lol
this one it seems. pretty hard to understand him with the french accent lol
He has a shitty accent, like a proud french !
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 908
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
He has a shitty accent, like a proud french ! | ||
|
Wolfstan
Canada605 Posts
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility-memos/posts/2014/02/27-tackling-social-mobility-black-men-reeves http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/lineage-lottery-the-myth-of-social-mobility-9152960.html Some articles I just read on social mobility. Neither the right nor left oppose it, however the the causes and solutions are much debated. Since western civilization doesn't have defined classes there seems to be consensus that wealth quintiles are the rungs on the ladder. Is 20% chance to land on any rung or having there be no wealth difference at all the desired outcome for the left? | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On February 28 2014 07:27 oneofthem wrote: if we are talking about the brutality or viciousness of exploitation, then the ancient world has us beat. but in other ways our modern world is similarly stratified, and this modern inequality is not totally accounted for by simple power exploitation. the true saying of rich gets richer is basically how modern inequality works and it's largely about the return of capital being higher than labor and human capital. Isn't it more an issue of different labor pay rates? ex. the big corporate CEO gets paid a lot for his labor, but the janitor cleaning the office doesn't. | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On February 28 2014 06:25 WhiteDog wrote: You can (in economy) measure productivity for an entire factor (capital, labor, or both) but not for a specific man. Sort of? Some jobs are pretty opaque in that respect, but I don't think it's that cut and dry. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On February 28 2014 09:11 JonnyBNoHo wrote: Isn't it more an issue of different labor pay rates? ex. the big corporate CEO gets paid a lot for his labor, but the janitor cleaning the office doesn't. labor stratification has its own can of worms (largely financial market efficiency, management philosphy changes, automation and all sorts of globalization/labor loss of leverage etc), but the issue of rich getting richer is basically the rising rent of having money. you can sit on assets and collect rent, managed by someone else. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On February 28 2014 09:11 JonnyBNoHo wrote: Isn't it more an issue of different labor pay rates? ex. the big corporate CEO gets paid a lot for his labor, but the janitor cleaning the office doesn't. No it's not. Basically since 30 years the top 1% gain less and less from labor and more and more from patrimony, in europe and the US (I gave some numbers but that seems wrongs, and I don't want to open a book right now). On February 28 2014 09:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote: Sort of? Some jobs are pretty opaque in that respect, but I don't think it's that cut and dry. Yes that's cut and dry. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18835 Posts
On February 28 2014 07:04 Wolfstan wrote: I would much rather have the unsuccessful blame themselves for their misfortune, get back up and try harder. I do not want the unsuccessful to blame the successful, luck, or society for misfortune. I do not think the successful should blame themselves for the misfortunes of the unsuccessful. Keeping in mind that your advice directed at the misfortunate goes against pretty much everything we know about how rehabilitation works, why exactly is it that you speak of these things as though the blame game is even an important aspect of the discussion at all? We're describing people living day to day without the promise of a meal or a place to sleep, children who walk daily to a school that effectively tells them that the society living around them doesn't care, and or the family beset by a single invalid who had the misfortune of being the chief bread winner prior to the accident; your desires insofar as the failure blame game go are entirely insignificant and insulting towards those who have faced real issue in their life only to find that a helping hand provided a way out that their tireless hard work, self sacrifice, and humility in the face of a menial occupation/existence simply could not. You may not know any of these people, but I and many others do, and no amount of flat faced denial propped up by a disbelief in the notion that bad things happen to good people is going to make their stories any less true. Believe it or not, Europe exists, and the real, living, breathing world is full to the brim with examples of how collectivization and an acknowledgement of the fact that society, luck, and greed all have meaningful and important effects on how human civilization has and will operate can work in harmony with one another in a way that individualism and the governmental mentality of a stern father simply cannot. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23437 Posts
On February 28 2014 08:29 Wolfstan wrote: http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21597925-want-make-america-less-unequal-here-are-some-suggestions-memo-obama http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility-memos/posts/2014/02/27-tackling-social-mobility-black-men-reeves http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/lineage-lottery-the-myth-of-social-mobility-9152960.html Some articles I just read on social mobility. Neither the right nor left oppose it, however the the causes and solutions are much debated. Since western civilization doesn't have defined classes there seems to be consensus that wealth quintiles are the rungs on the ladder. Is 20% chance to land on any rung or having there be no wealth difference at all the desired outcome for the left? Can we all agree that the current wealth distribution is not what most Americans want? And that the wealth could be distributed in significantly more effective and efficient ways that would result in a mutual benefit for all those involved? We can still bicker about how we can influence this distribution without causing the most unintentional and devastating consequences. But can we at least agree that the current distribution is (or will be) a problem for everyone? | ||
|
Wolfstan
Canada605 Posts
On February 28 2014 09:25 farvacola wrote: Keeping in mind that your advice directed at the misfortunate goes against pretty much everything we know about how rehabilitation works, why exactly is it that you speak of these things as though the blame game is even an important aspect of the discussion at all? We're describing people living day to day without the promise of a meal or a place to sleep, children who walk daily to a school that effectively tells them that the society living around them doesn't care, and or the family beset by a single invalid who had the misfortune of being the chief bread winner prior to the accident; your desires insofar as the failure blame game go are entirely insignificant and insulting towards those who have faced real issue in their life only to find that a helping hand provided a way out that their tireless hard work, self sacrifice, and humility in the face of a menial occupation/existence simply could not. You may not know any of these people, but I and many others do, and no amount of flat faced denial propped up by a disbelief in the notion that bad things happen to good people is going to make their stories any less true. Believe it or not, Europe exists, and the real, living, breathing world is full to the brim with examples of how collectivization and an acknowledgement of the fact that society, luck, and greed all have meaningful and important effects on how human civilization has and will operate can work in harmony with one another in a way that individualism and the governmental mentality of a stern father simply cannot. I do know people who have misfortune thrust upon them and they still have my contempt because they have serious individual flaws that need to be addressed before they are able to retain any semblance of success in life. A lifetime of poor decisions and irresponsibility put them where they are now. I focus my compassion and helping hand on an individual level rather than piss time time and money away on government policy and macroeconomic solutions for people who refuse to help themselves. I will get my to friends and family to succeed not some dude 3000 miles away. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
Jormundr
United States1678 Posts
On February 28 2014 09:57 Wolfstan wrote: I do know people who have misfortune thrust upon them and they still have my contempt because they have serious individual flaws that need to be addressed before they are able to retain any semblance of success in life. A lifetime of poor decisions and irresponsibility put them where they are now. I focus my compassion and helping hand on an individual level rather than piss time time and money away on government policy and macroeconomic solutions for people who refuse to help themselves. I will get my to friends and family to succeed not some dude 3000 miles away. You seem to know a lot about some group of people who you claim you don't spend any time on... You have also built a very large man out of straw. Could you be more specific or are you insinuating that people who aren't rich are subhuman fucks who can't do anything right? | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On February 28 2014 09:57 Wolfstan wrote: I do know people who have misfortune thrust upon them and they still have my contempt because they have serious individual flaws that need to be addressed before they are able to retain any semblance of success in life. A lifetime of poor decisions and irresponsibility put them where they are now. I focus my compassion and helping hand on an individual level rather than piss time time and money away on government policy and macroeconomic solutions for people who refuse to help themselves. I will get my to friends and family to succeed not some dude 3000 miles away. I think that this kind of mentality, at its core, is fundamentally a belief in both a blank slate (i.e. being born without any inherent [dis]advantages or proclivities, meaning that you are equally likely to pursue any path), and a belief in radical free will. Only people who believe that people's choices are made in a vaccuum can hold onto beliefs about the moral culpability of the unsuccessful. This is fundamentally at odds with the reality of mind. People would be wise to adopt a situationist perspective, where they appreciate that the choices are always constrained, both by the past and present situation. This radical individualism, conceiving of man as an island, apart from the maelstrom of deterministic processes, requires a kind of schizophrenia. Everything is connected, but the radical individualist demands complete control over his own state of being, and holds others accountable for theirs. You should really contemplate the birth lottery some time. You could have been born to a rural Muslim family in Pakistan. The chances are overwhelmingly likely that you would be uneducated, except perhaps in the Koran. You would almost definitely be poor for life. You would probably be envious of Americans, while simultaneously thinking that they are ungodly. And most importantly of all, you would not be able to do anything about it. | ||
|
Wolfstan
Canada605 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + I recently (Feb 20th) bought my friend a $630 plane ticket for my down on his luck friend to move in with me and get his life back together. He called me up asking for a helping hand up and I obliged telling him if he followed my advice he would have a middle class life for his family by Labour Day. He has 2 kids preschool and toddler with a bottom 20% woman back in Newfoundland. He has been fired from Mcdonald's and was working overnights at a bakery for a non-living wage. He has never paid rent on time and still has Feb 1 overdue. First step was to leave his family and come to Calgary at my expense and a promise to follow my advice and pay his debts. He arrives in Calgary to an already hired 70-100k/yr blue collar Job. He then spent 3 of 4 days off blackout drunk despite my disapproval. When it came time to write down our goals he had no idea of what kind of man he wanted to be and had a depressed, noncommittal attitude about the goals we were setting for him. Me: "I want you to read one book within 3 months" Him staring vacantly at the computer: "You're a book" He is off on site right now and we are going to review his goals every 2 weeks. We are going to have him set up for Labour Day with his girlfriend and kids but the character he and his woman will impart upon their children leaves me little hope that they will succeed. I see no way our government or society will help him better than what I'm doing as an individual. His lot in life is own, his choices are his own, it's not mine, my bosses, my company or my industry that will determine where he ends up. I am very patriotic and grateful that we live in a society where people can move up and down form social classes. So his story is the face I put to the misfortunes of others and at the same time the opportunities that the system that is set up allows him to make a better life for himself and his kids. End rant/ramble | ||
|
Wolfstan
Canada605 Posts
This radical individualism, conceiving of man as an island, apart from the maelstrom of deterministic processes, requires a kind of schizophrenia. Everything is connected, but the radical individualist demands complete control over his own state of being, and holds others accountable for theirs. It's very rational to me that it's easier to change the island than the maelstrom. You should really contemplate the birth lottery some time. You could have been born to a rural Muslim family in Pakistan. The chances are overwhelmingly likely that you would be uneducated, except perhaps in the Koran. You would almost definitely be poor for life. You would probably be envious of Americans, while simultaneously thinking that they are ungodly. And most importantly of all, you would not be able to do anything about it. I would rather just be me, and change things in my circle of influence. It seems to me to be a waste of energy trying to extend my circle of influence to a rural Muslim family, or an inner city black man. I am not particularly affected by the problems nor am I able to evaluate the outcome of rehabilitation attempts. | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 28 2014 08:29 Wolfstan wrote: http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21597925-want-make-america-less-unequal-here-are-some-suggestions-memo-obama http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility-memos/posts/2014/02/27-tackling-social-mobility-black-men-reeves http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/lineage-lottery-the-myth-of-social-mobility-9152960.html Some articles I just read on social mobility. Neither the right nor left oppose it, however the the causes and solutions are much debated. Since western civilization doesn't have defined classes there seems to be consensus that wealth quintiles are the rungs on the ladder. Is 20% chance to land on any rung or having there be no wealth difference at all the desired outcome for the left? Shouldn't the actual ideal target be that your position in life is based on merit no matter where you come from. As far as I can tell this is the position of the reasonable left. And considering that most of US left wants to achieve was already implemented elsewhere and that those countries have higher social mobility than US would give a hint to what works and what does not. | ||
KwarK
United States43187 Posts
On February 28 2014 11:00 Wolfstan wrote: I am very patriotic and grateful that we live in a society where people can move up and down form social classes. Social mobility is awful in the US, why on earth would you be patriotic about people moving between classes in the US of all places. This is just plain delusion. The facts simply do not agree with your beliefs, the US is hugely outperformed by the interventionist states in Northern Europe when it comes to social mobility. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility#Country_comparison The US is only ahead of the UK as a shitty place to be born poor in the developed world, and only just. Your feelings of patriotism are not rooted in the success of the US, for it has no success, it's failing horribly, but rather your own delusional beliefs in the American mythos and ignorance about how badly the US compares to the rest of the developed world. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On February 28 2014 10:21 IgnE wrote: I think that this kind of mentality, at its core, is fundamentally a belief in both a blank slate (i.e. being born without any inherent [dis]advantages or proclivities, meaning that you are equally likely to pursue any path), and a belief in radical free will. This. This whole "you're to blame because your life sucks" mentality stems from a stone age worldview that I just can't comprehend. We're physical beings and we get influenced by our environment. We are not unicorns that can magically do what they want no matter what kind of situation we grow up in. The whole 'American dream' idea is pretty great, but ironically the US' social mobility is on a level with Peru and Chile. The Scandinavian countries are doing best followed by Canada and Australia. There's a very close correlation between income inequality and social mobility. Less redistribution and less government involvement does not help the poor people move up and does not increase social mobility. There is not a single piece of empirical evidence that this would be the case. | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 28 2014 11:11 KwarK wrote: Social mobility is awful in the US, why on earth would you be patriotic about people moving between classes in the US of all places. This is just plain delusion. The facts simply do not agree with your beliefs, the US is hugely outperformed by the interventionist states in Northern Europe when it comes to social mobility. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_mobility#Country_comparison The US is only ahead of the UK as a shitty place to be born poor in the developed world, and only just. Your feelings of patriotism are not rooted in the success of the US, for it has no success, it's failing horribly, but rather your own delusional beliefs in the American mythos and ignorance about how badly the US compares to the rest of the developed world. Isn't he Canadian ? | ||
|
Sub40APM
6336 Posts
I think he is in imagination land when he says things like He arrives in Calgary to an already hired 70-100k/yr blue collar Job. | ||
| ||
.
