On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
No I mean, I can't argue with you. I'm just obviously so delusional.
actually you know what? i'm right because i'm right. and i win the argument because im right. therefore im right. maybe you'll take to that logic.
What? I'm not sure if you're trolling now or what. I give you reasons and a video of why this welfare-state is wrong, and you make some outrageous comment. Cool.
Yes, he is trolling you. He's trolling you because you still haven't realized your justification of the "fact" that the wealthiest Americans are such because they work the hardest was completely circular. He's trolling you because everyone in the thread called you out on it and you selectively ignored that.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than your anecdotes, what your mom and dad told you, and YouTube videos? If so, what? We're all curious.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than what your psychology teacher told you?
Dude, the wealthiest Americans do in fact work the hardest. The ones that are born in to wealth had parents that worked hard for them. It's fair.
If you're going to work hard, save your money, and invest, then you deserve all your wealth and shouldn't have it taken away only to be given to someone too lazy to work.
lol this is such idealistic trash, you won't believe the kind of job offers my bro got just being in our states top prep school and being friends with CEO's sons.
Some work hard, some have connections, some have luck, some pass it on, some families just spiral into degenerate trust fund babies that don't do shit.
On February 12 2012 08:13 Lightwip wrote: For hundreds of years, Europe spent fortunes on a military so that they could colonize the entire world. But after they killed each other so much in WWII that they just couldn't do it anymore, they decided to start complaining about how the United States does things(all the while complaining about American WWI/II isolationism). Funny how it works, huh?
It doesn't necessarily mean that you're rich if you work hard. However, the United States has a great degree of upward mobility. Even the poorest of immigrants can succeed here if they work hard. If you can do something really well that few other people can do that is useful, you can become extremely wealthy(CEO and such). It's harder to do this when you have to pay a fortune in taxes for government programs, no?
Of course the United States has problems, but so does Europe(Euro crisis for example). But don't think that what works for Europe must work for the United States too. It's two entirely different situations. European counties have a much less diverse and a much smaller population and landmass. Things tend to run more smoothly in general under such circumstances. Ever tried to build a transcontinental railroad? Probably not, because Europe doesn't have to have such large projects. That one project defined an era and had a complicated mess of turmoil, corruption, and politics that Europe avoided because of their division.
Europe(and Canada) and the United States are not the same. Let's not pretend the same things apply for both of them.
This is a myth. economic mobility is much lower in USA than in Canada and Scandinavian countries, even with much higher taxes.
That's not the only thing the poster got wrong. Europe has a larger population.
I do believe I mentioned European COUNTRIES.The EU is too loose a group to count.
You can't bunch up all European countries in one group, and generalize everything. Saying Government involvement is bad, and point your finger at Greece, is misinformation.
At the same time, ignoring Greece is just as big of a problem(Look at Italy as well, which is having a similar problem). Europe has very similar situations in the same way that the various parts of the United States are more alike than they are different. In that way, it is fair to compare.
Some systems are clearly better than others. Europe has some problems the United States does not have(EU GDP per capita is pretty low), and the United States has some problems Europe does not(a healthcare system that sucks and a non-university education that is mediocre). Each can learn from the other, but Europe is more comparable to its individual countries than to the United States. But the problems are not necessarily comparable because situations are different.
On February 12 2012 08:13 Lightwip wrote: For hundreds of years, Europe spent fortunes on a military so that they could colonize the entire world. But after they killed each other so much in WWII that they just couldn't do it anymore, they decided to start complaining about how the United States does things(all the while complaining about American WWI/II isolationism). Funny how it works, huh?
It doesn't necessarily mean that you're rich if you work hard. However, the United States has a great degree of upward mobility. Even the poorest of immigrants can succeed here if they work hard. If you can do something really well that few other people can do that is useful, you can become extremely wealthy(CEO and such). It's harder to do this when you have to pay a fortune in taxes for government programs, no?
Of course the United States has problems, but so does Europe(Euro crisis for example). But don't think that what works for Europe must work for the United States too. It's two entirely different situations. European counties have a much less diverse and a much smaller population and landmass. Things tend to run more smoothly in general under such circumstances. Ever tried to build a transcontinental railroad? Probably not, because Europe doesn't have to have such large projects. That one project defined an era and had a complicated mess of turmoil, corruption, and politics that Europe avoided because of their division.
Europe(and Canada) and the United States are not the same. Let's not pretend the same things apply for both of them.
This is a myth. economic mobility is much lower in USA than in Canada and Scandinavian countries, even with much higher taxes.
That's not the only thing the poster got wrong. Europe has a larger population.
I do believe I mentioned European COUNTRIES.The EU is too loose a group to count.
You talk about Europe as a single entity when it suits you, when you are finger painting a historical narrative, when it doesn't Europe is "too lose a group to count"?
Nice dodge on the social mobility data too.
In some ways Europe is similar enough to be grouped as one entity, but if it's a single entity it's more of a confederacy than anything else. I think that's easy enough to see.
I didn't dodge, I just didn't address yet. Honestly, the biggest reason is simply that the United States has a pretty stable economy, growing at a pretty low rate simply because it's so developed. The socio-economic gap is pretty high between groups. Europe certainly takes care of the poor and gives them more opportunities(this is not to say that the US is bad at this), but it's often at the expense of the wealthier, making the socio-economic gap smaller.
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
No I mean, I can't argue with you. I'm just obviously so delusional.
actually you know what? i'm right because i'm right. and i win the argument because im right. therefore im right. maybe you'll take to that logic.
What? I'm not sure if you're trolling now or what. I give you reasons and a video of why this welfare-state is wrong, and you make some outrageous comment. Cool.
Yes, he is trolling you. He's trolling you because you still haven't realized your justification of the "fact" that the wealthiest Americans are such because they work the hardest was completely circular. He's trolling you because everyone in the thread called you out on it and you selectively ignored that.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than your anecdotes, what your mom and dad told you, and YouTube videos? If so, what? We're all curious.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than what your psychology teacher told you?
Dude, the wealthiest Americans do in fact work the hardest. The ones that are born in to wealth had parents that worked hard for them. It's fair.
If you're going to work hard, save your money, and invest, then you deserve all your wealth and shouldn't have it taken away only to be given to someone too lazy to work.
If the wealthiest Americans work the hardest then all the non-white folks are poor because they are genetically inferior... amiright? If I'm not, please explain how the non-whites do so poorly in such a well put together society.
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
No I mean, I can't argue with you. I'm just obviously so delusional.
actually you know what? i'm right because i'm right. and i win the argument because im right. therefore im right. maybe you'll take to that logic.
What? I'm not sure if you're trolling now or what. I give you reasons and a video of why this welfare-state is wrong, and you make some outrageous comment. Cool.
Yes, he is trolling you. He's trolling you because you still haven't realized your justification of the "fact" that the wealthiest Americans are such because they work the hardest was completely circular. He's trolling you because everyone in the thread called you out on it and you selectively ignored that.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than your anecdotes, what your mom and dad told you, and YouTube videos? If so, what? We're all curious.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than what your psychology teacher told you?
Dude, the wealthiest Americans do in fact work the hardest. The ones that are born in to wealth had parents that worked hard for them. It's fair.
If you're going to work hard, save your money, and invest, then you deserve all your wealth and shouldn't have it taken away only to be given to someone too lazy to work.
If the wealthiest Americans work the hardest then all the non-white folks are poor because they are genetically inferior... amiright? If I'm not, please explain how the non-whites do so poorly in such a well put together society.
You have the same problem. A large part of it is simply that they start lower than others, so it's easier to stay poorer.
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
SO we agree that to have a good start at life, you need a good education. The Capitalist system is the very reason that they aren't getting a education. Poor parents gives the child poor education, and with poor education you stay poor.
The best answer is for the government to finance a education for these children, so these can have a real shot at life. The money will later be payed back with taxes (they will pay more taxes because they will have a higher income, because of better education).
Not entirely true. You don't need an education to realize that living off of welfare and stealing is wrong.
Refusing to take the welfare wont give them an education and ability to move upwards economically.
You don't need free stuff from wealthier people to obtain upward mobility lol. It would have been impossible for nations to develop if that were true, unless we had space aliens to steal from and the records are gone.
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
SO we agree that to have a good start at life, you need a good education. The Capitalist system is the very reason that they aren't getting a education. Poor parents gives the child poor education, and with poor education you stay poor.
The best answer is for the government to finance a education for these children, so these can have a real shot at life. The money will later be payed back with taxes (they will pay more taxes because they will have a higher income, because of better education).
Not entirely true. You don't need an education to realize that living off of welfare and stealing is wrong.
Refusing to take the welfare wont give them an education and ability to move upwards economically.
You don't need free stuff from wealthier people to obtain upward mobility lol. It would have been impossible for nations to develop if that were true, unless we had space aliens to steal from and the records are gone.
It's not about upward mobility. It's about not starving to death.
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
No I mean, I can't argue with you. I'm just obviously so delusional.
actually you know what? i'm right because i'm right. and i win the argument because im right. therefore im right. maybe you'll take to that logic.
What? I'm not sure if you're trolling now or what. I give you reasons and a video of why this welfare-state is wrong, and you make some outrageous comment. Cool.
Yes, he is trolling you. He's trolling you because you still haven't realized your justification of the "fact" that the wealthiest Americans are such because they work the hardest was completely circular. He's trolling you because everyone in the thread called you out on it and you selectively ignored that.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than your anecdotes, what your mom and dad told you, and YouTube videos? If so, what? We're all curious.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than what your psychology teacher told you?
Dude, the wealthiest Americans do in fact work the hardest. The ones that are born in to wealth had parents that worked hard for them. It's fair.
If you're going to work hard, save your money, and invest, then you deserve all your wealth and shouldn't have it taken away only to be given to someone too lazy to work.
If the wealthiest Americans work the hardest then all the non-white folks are poor because they are genetically inferior... amiright? If I'm not, please explain how the non-whites do so poorly in such a well put together society.
Dzemoo never implied anywhere in his post that work ethic had anything to do with genetics or race. Please take your straw men out of here.
When I put away the stereotypes in my mind and think of all the people who are wealthier than me that I know personally, they all work much, much harder than I do, or than I would be willing to do. I just don't value money that much, I value my time more. Obviously the component that dzemoo is not mentioning here is education. It takes hard work and education. I know some blue collar guys who work their ass off, but they don't have the sense or knowledge required to ever rise anywhere. Part of the problem is the culture that many people grow up in which doesn't value education, and which prioritizes attitudes of victimization and blame instead of self-improvement.
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
No I mean, I can't argue with you. I'm just obviously so delusional.
actually you know what? i'm right because i'm right. and i win the argument because im right. therefore im right. maybe you'll take to that logic.
What? I'm not sure if you're trolling now or what. I give you reasons and a video of why this welfare-state is wrong, and you make some outrageous comment. Cool.
Yes, he is trolling you. He's trolling you because you still haven't realized your justification of the "fact" that the wealthiest Americans are such because they work the hardest was completely circular. He's trolling you because everyone in the thread called you out on it and you selectively ignored that.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than your anecdotes, what your mom and dad told you, and YouTube videos? If so, what? We're all curious.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than what your psychology teacher told you?
Dude, the wealthiest Americans do in fact work the hardest. The ones that are born in to wealth had parents that worked hard for them. It's fair.
If you're going to work hard, save your money, and invest, then you deserve all your wealth and shouldn't have it taken away only to be given to someone too lazy to work.
If the wealthiest Americans work the hardest then all the non-white folks are poor because they are genetically inferior... amiright? If I'm not, please explain how the non-whites do so poorly in such a well put together society.
Dzemoo never implied anywhere in his post that work ethic had anything to do with genetics or race. Please take your straw men out of here.
When I put away the stereotypes in my mind and think of all the people who are wealthier than me that I know personally, they all work much, much harder than I do, or than I would be willing to do. I just don't value money that much, I value my time more. Obviously the component that dzemoo is not mentioning here is education. It takes hard work and education. I know some blue collar guys who work their ass off, but they don't have the sense or knowledge required to ever rise anywhere. Part of the problem is the culture that many people grow up in which doesn't value education, and which prioritizes attitudes of victimization and blame instead of self-improvement.
It wasn't a strawman. He was pointing out the obvious conclusion of Dzemoo's views given that "non-white folks" are far less wealthy on average.
If he'd been more careful, he would have said that Dzemoo must conclude that either these people are genetically inferior with respect to work effort or cultural factors make it the case that they are. Neither of these things would imply that they deserve less than the wealthy, and the first is racist garbage.
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
No I mean, I can't argue with you. I'm just obviously so delusional.
actually you know what? i'm right because i'm right. and i win the argument because im right. therefore im right. maybe you'll take to that logic.
What? I'm not sure if you're trolling now or what. I give you reasons and a video of why this welfare-state is wrong, and you make some outrageous comment. Cool.
Yes, he is trolling you. He's trolling you because you still haven't realized your justification of the "fact" that the wealthiest Americans are such because they work the hardest was completely circular. He's trolling you because everyone in the thread called you out on it and you selectively ignored that.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than your anecdotes, what your mom and dad told you, and YouTube videos? If so, what? We're all curious.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than what your psychology teacher told you?
Dude, the wealthiest Americans do in fact work the hardest. The ones that are born in to wealth had parents that worked hard for them. It's fair.
If you're going to work hard, save your money, and invest, then you deserve all your wealth and shouldn't have it taken away only to be given to someone too lazy to work.
If the wealthiest Americans work the hardest then all the non-white folks are poor because they are genetically inferior... amiright? If I'm not, please explain how the non-whites do so poorly in such a well put together society.
Dzemoo never implied anywhere in his post that work ethic had anything to do with genetics or race. Please take your straw men out of here.
When I put away the stereotypes in my mind and think of all the people who are wealthier than me that I know personally, they all work much, much harder than I do, or than I would be willing to do. I just don't value money that much, I value my time more. Obviously the component that dzemoo is not mentioning here is education. It takes hard work and education. I know some blue collar guys who work their ass off, but they don't have the sense or knowledge required to ever rise anywhere. Part of the problem is the culture that many people grow up in which doesn't value education, and which prioritizes attitudes of victimization and blame instead of self-improvement.
Even if people value an education, there are plenty of people out there that want a quality education but do not have access to one because of the state of the education system here in the States. Not only that, plenty of people don't even have access to food, shelter, or medical care because they were born into unfortunate circumstances. People also frequently run into discrimination of all kinds that denies them of basic opportunities. So no, this is not the fairytale world that blind Republicans think it is. It's not simply a matter of having the work ethic to make the money, it's a matter of having the opportunity to put that work ethic to good use, which millions across this country do not have.
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
No I mean, I can't argue with you. I'm just obviously so delusional.
actually you know what? i'm right because i'm right. and i win the argument because im right. therefore im right. maybe you'll take to that logic.
What? I'm not sure if you're trolling now or what. I give you reasons and a video of why this welfare-state is wrong, and you make some outrageous comment. Cool.
Yes, he is trolling you. He's trolling you because you still haven't realized your justification of the "fact" that the wealthiest Americans are such because they work the hardest was completely circular. He's trolling you because everyone in the thread called you out on it and you selectively ignored that.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than your anecdotes, what your mom and dad told you, and YouTube videos? If so, what? We're all curious.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than what your psychology teacher told you?
Dude, the wealthiest Americans do in fact work the hardest. The ones that are born in to wealth had parents that worked hard for them. It's fair.
If you're going to work hard, save your money, and invest, then you deserve all your wealth and shouldn't have it taken away only to be given to someone too lazy to work.
If the wealthiest Americans work the hardest then all the non-white folks are poor because they are genetically inferior... amiright? If I'm not, please explain how the non-whites do so poorly in such a well put together society.
You have the same problem. A large part of it is simply that they start lower than others, so it's easier to stay poorer.
Who is you? I've never that in any country the wealthiest work the hardest. I'm just saying that making that statement ends up in a pretty racist place.
On February 12 2012 09:09 liberal wrote: Dzemoo never implied anywhere in his post that work ethic had anything to do with genetics or race. Please take your straw men out of here.
The wealthy are hard working and the poor are lazy. Non-whites are disproportionately poor. Therefore non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
I don't think it's a straw man, it's a conclusion which is difficult to escape given his initial assumptions. I was really looking forward to watching him try, or not.
In deference to Stealth Blue and the thread itself...
On February 12 2012 08:25 Yongwang wrote: Ron Paul is actually winning the GOP race! Take a look at this:
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
No I mean, I can't argue with you. I'm just obviously so delusional.
actually you know what? i'm right because i'm right. and i win the argument because im right. therefore im right. maybe you'll take to that logic.
What? I'm not sure if you're trolling now or what. I give you reasons and a video of why this welfare-state is wrong, and you make some outrageous comment. Cool.
Yes, he is trolling you. He's trolling you because you still haven't realized your justification of the "fact" that the wealthiest Americans are such because they work the hardest was completely circular. He's trolling you because everyone in the thread called you out on it and you selectively ignored that.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than your anecdotes, what your mom and dad told you, and YouTube videos? If so, what? We're all curious.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than what your psychology teacher told you?
Dude, the wealthiest Americans do in fact work the hardest. The ones that are born in to wealth had parents that worked hard for them. It's fair.
If you're going to work hard, save your money, and invest, then you deserve all your wealth and shouldn't have it taken away only to be given to someone too lazy to work.
If the wealthiest Americans work the hardest then all the non-white folks are poor because they are genetically inferior... amiright? If I'm not, please explain how the non-whites do so poorly in such a well put together society.
Dzemoo never implied anywhere in his post that work ethic had anything to do with genetics or race. Please take your straw men out of here.
When I put away the stereotypes in my mind and think of all the people who are wealthier than me that I know personally, they all work much, much harder than I do, or than I would be willing to do. I just don't value money that much, I value my time more. Obviously the component that dzemoo is not mentioning here is education. It takes hard work and education. I know some blue collar guys who work their ass off, but they don't have the sense or knowledge required to ever rise anywhere. Part of the problem is the culture that many people grow up in which doesn't value education, and which prioritizes attitudes of victimization and blame instead of self-improvement.
Even if people value an education, there are plenty of people out there that want a quality education but do not have access to one because of the state of the education system here in the States. Not only that, plenty of people don't even have access to food, shelter, or medical care because they were born into unfortunate circumstances. People also frequently run into discrimination of all kinds that denies them of basic opportunities. So no, this is not the fairytale world that blind Republicans think it is. It's not simply a matter of having the work ethic to make the money, it's a matter of having the opportunity to put that work ethic to good use, which millions across this country do not have.
On February 12 2012 09:31 Dapper_Cad wrote: The wealthy are hard working and the poor are lazy. Non-whites are disproportionately poor. Therefore non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
I don't think it's a straw man, it's a conclusion which is difficult to escape given his initial assumptions. I was really looking forward to watching him try, or not.
In deference to Stealth Blue and the thread itself...
I disagree, just because A = B and B = C, does not mean that A = C.
On February 12 2012 09:31 Dapper_Cad wrote: The wealthy are hard working and the poor are lazy. Non-whites are disproportionately poor. Therefore non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
I don't think it's a straw man, it's a conclusion which is difficult to escape given his initial assumptions. I was really looking forward to watching him try, or not.
In deference to Stealth Blue and the thread itself...
I disagree, just because A = B and B = C, does not mean that A = C.
It seems legit, especially coming from a source that is ideologically opposite to that of Ron Paul.
A doesnt = B and B doesnt = C. It requires all 3 statements to be true. If you only take the first 2 premises, you prove nothing, if you take the second premise and the conclusion you prove nothing, but if you put the three together you do. For some people its easier to understand in a statement, because logic is not their strongsuit, so here you go.
If you believe that rich people are only rich because they work hard, and poor people are only poor because they are lazy, and you believe that non-whites are disproportionnately poor, you believe it is because non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
On February 12 2012 09:31 Dapper_Cad wrote: The wealthy are hard working and the poor are lazy. Non-whites are disproportionately poor. Therefore non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
I don't think it's a straw man, it's a conclusion which is difficult to escape given his initial assumptions. I was really looking forward to watching him try, or not.
In deference to Stealth Blue and the thread itself...
I disagree, just because A = B and B = C, does not mean that A = C.
My reasoning is far from bullet-proof but I'm afraid you're wrong there. If A = B and B = C then A does indeed = C. (Edit, as the poster above pointed out I wasn't even what I was actually saying... see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syllogism)
It seems legit, especially coming from a source that is ideologically opposite to that of Ron Paul.
Ideologically opposite... I'd say no, but they were certainly interested in making the Ron Paul campaign statements appear to be admissions of guilt of some kind. It was a compelling piece.
Thing is I really don't understand the U.S. electoral system well at all and the primaries seem to me to be particularly obscure. Can anyone confirm or deny what the Paul campaign is saying? I'm just excited because Ron Paul being the GoP presidential candidate would make for a WAY more interesting election.
On February 12 2012 09:31 Dapper_Cad wrote: The wealthy are hard working and the poor are lazy. Non-whites are disproportionately poor. Therefore non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
I don't think it's a straw man, it's a conclusion which is difficult to escape given his initial assumptions. I was really looking forward to watching him try, or not.
In deference to Stealth Blue and the thread itself...
I disagree, just because A = B and B = C, does not mean that A = C.
It seems legit, especially coming from a source that is ideologically opposite to that of Ron Paul.
A doesnt = B and B doesnt = C. It requires all 3 statements to be true. If you only take the first 2 premises, you prove nothing, if you take the second premise and the conclusion you prove nothing, but if you put the three together you do. For some people its easier to understand in a statement, because logic is not their strongsuit, so here you go.
If you believe that rich people are only rich because they work hard, and poor people are only poor because they are lazy, and you believe that non-whites are disproportionnately poor, you believe it is because non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
Thanks for expanding upon that, you made it easier to understand than I did and pointed out a flaw in the version of the theorem that I used.
On February 12 2012 09:31 Dapper_Cad wrote: The wealthy are hard working and the poor are lazy. Non-whites are disproportionately poor. Therefore non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
I don't think it's a straw man, it's a conclusion which is difficult to escape given his initial assumptions. I was really looking forward to watching him try, or not.
In deference to Stealth Blue and the thread itself...
I disagree, just because A = B and B = C, does not mean that A = C.
It seems legit, especially coming from a source that is ideologically opposite to that of Ron Paul.
A doesnt = B and B doesnt = C. It requires all 3 statements to be true. If you only take the first 2 premises, you prove nothing, if you take the second premise and the conclusion you prove nothing, but if you put the three together you do. For some people its easier to understand in a statement, because logic is not their strongsuit, so here you go.
If you believe that rich people are only rich because they work hard, and poor people are only poor because they are lazy, and you believe that non-whites are disproportionnately poor, you believe it is because non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
Fucking fuck. Here on TL I thought I could get a break after taking a grueling LSAT exam after studying up on logical conditions for months straight....
On February 12 2012 09:31 Dapper_Cad wrote: The wealthy are hard working and the poor are lazy. Non-whites are disproportionately poor. Therefore non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
I don't think it's a straw man, it's a conclusion which is difficult to escape given his initial assumptions. I was really looking forward to watching him try, or not.
In deference to Stealth Blue and the thread itself...
I disagree, just because A = B and B = C, does not mean that A = C.
It seems legit, especially coming from a source that is ideologically opposite to that of Ron Paul.
A doesnt = B and B doesnt = C. It requires all 3 statements to be true. If you only take the first 2 premises, you prove nothing, if you take the second premise and the conclusion you prove nothing, but if you put the three together you do. For some people its easier to understand in a statement, because logic is not their strongsuit, so here you go.
If you believe that rich people are only rich because they work hard, and poor people are only poor because they are lazy, and you believe that non-whites are disproportionnately poor, you believe it is because non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
But the point I made above, which everyone seemed to completely ignore to focus on my first sentence, was that calling rich people hard working does not necessitate that all poor people are lazy. There are multiple factors that go into a person's wealth, including education.
Since we've got some pseudo logic in here, perhaps I can appeal to your format.
Wealthy people are hard working. Bob isn't wealthy. Therefore, Bob isn't hard working.
On February 12 2012 09:31 Dapper_Cad wrote: The wealthy are hard working and the poor are lazy. Non-whites are disproportionately poor. Therefore non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
I don't think it's a straw man, it's a conclusion which is difficult to escape given his initial assumptions. I was really looking forward to watching him try, or not.
In deference to Stealth Blue and the thread itself...
I disagree, just because A = B and B = C, does not mean that A = C.
It seems legit, especially coming from a source that is ideologically opposite to that of Ron Paul.
A doesnt = B and B doesnt = C. It requires all 3 statements to be true. If you only take the first 2 premises, you prove nothing, if you take the second premise and the conclusion you prove nothing, but if you put the three together you do. For some people its easier to understand in a statement, because logic is not their strongsuit, so here you go.
If you believe that rich people are only rich because they work hard, and poor people are only poor because they are lazy, and you believe that non-whites are disproportionnately poor, you believe it is because non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
But the point I made above, which everyone seemed to completely ignore to focus on my first sentence, was that calling rich people hard working does not necessitate that all poor people are lazy. There are multiple factors that go into a person's wealth, including education.
Since we've got some pseudo logic in here, perhaps I can appeal to your format.
Wealthy people are hard working. Bob isn't wealthy. Therefore, Bob isn't hard working.
On February 12 2012 07:25 Dzemoo wrote: Lol I'm tried of hearing these Liberals whine about the 1%.
Honestly, who are you to tell someone what to do with their hard working money? They're the 1% for a reason, because they worked harder in one day then you did in your whole life.
how do you measure how hard you've worked?
By how rich you are.
He's been committed this entire time to the proposition not just that the wealthy are hard working but also that they are more hard working than the poor.
On February 12 2012 09:31 Dapper_Cad wrote: The wealthy are hard working and the poor are lazy. Non-whites are disproportionately poor. Therefore non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
I don't think it's a straw man, it's a conclusion which is difficult to escape given his initial assumptions. I was really looking forward to watching him try, or not.
In deference to Stealth Blue and the thread itself...
I disagree, just because A = B and B = C, does not mean that A = C.
It seems legit, especially coming from a source that is ideologically opposite to that of Ron Paul.
A doesnt = B and B doesnt = C. It requires all 3 statements to be true. If you only take the first 2 premises, you prove nothing, if you take the second premise and the conclusion you prove nothing, but if you put the three together you do. For some people its easier to understand in a statement, because logic is not their strongsuit, so here you go.
If you believe that rich people are only rich because they work hard, and poor people are only poor because they are lazy, and you believe that non-whites are disproportionnately poor, you believe it is because non-whites are disproportionately lazy.
But the point I made above, which everyone seemed to completely ignore to focus on my first sentence, was that calling rich people hard working does not necessitate that all poor people are lazy. There are multiple factors that go into a person's wealth, including education.
Since we've got some pseudo logic in here, perhaps I can appeal to your format.
Wealthy people are hard working. Bob isn't wealthy. Therefore, Bob isn't hard working.
Do you see the error now?
This was the original sentence I took issue with
On February 12 2012 08:37 Dzemoo wrote: the wealthiest Americans do in fact work the hardest
Hardest. An important difference given your rebuttal. And yes, it looks like is should have phrased my syllogism better, apologies.
again it goes back to: how do you measure hard work? laborers usually spend more physical energy, and more amount of time than the wealthy. add on top of that being a single parent, with no healthcare, working multiple different jobs, etc. how are you going to quantify your "hard work"?
EPT![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c7/Intergenerational_mobility_graph-1.jpg/500px-Intergenerational_mobility_graph-1.jpg)
