Santafairy Korea (South). Jul 06 2019 17:18. Posts 2226
"getting taxes cut is meaningless" this seems tone deaf, didn't someone just post a few pages ago how many households are one $400 emergency away from going broke?
The bottom line, then, is becoming clearer with every quarter. The tax cuts did almost nothing for ordinary Americans and may even have cost them money. The apparent gains in their income were negligible and short-lived. Wealthy Americans reaped the benefits of lower taxes and higher dividends. The cuts had a negligible effect on U.S. economic growth while depriving the government of revenue.
cliffs:
-wages are stagnant so we shouldn't bother lowering taxes on the middle class because that didn't raise their wages (in a year)
-if we lower taxes on the middle class we won't be able to afford all these lockheed martin jets and designer solar panels and transvestite storytime for elementary schoolers and the government may be forced to reconsider its spending habits. keep slaving away for our washington coffers.
The Tax Policy Center estimates that 65 percent of people paid less under the law and that just 6 percent paid more. (The rest saw little change to their taxes.)
Other analyses reached similar conclusions. The Joint Committee on Taxation — Congress’s nonpartisan team of tax analysts — found that every income group would see a tax cut on average. So did the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a left-leaning think tank that was sharply critical of the law. In fact, that group went even further: In a December 2017 analysis, it found that every income group in every state would pay less on average under the law in 2019.
So far, tax season seems to be playing out more or less as the experts predicted. H&R Block, the tax-preparation giant, said last week that two-thirds of returning customers had paid less tax this year than last (excluding people who owed no tax in either year). Taxes were down, on average, in every state.
fucking 65% getting away with murder again. occupy main street.
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
1
NMcNasty United States. Jul 06 2019 19:35. Posts 2039
On July 06 2019 16:18 Santafairy wrote:
"getting taxes cut is meaningless" this seems tone deaf, didn't someone just post a few pages ago how many households are one $400 emergency away from going broke?
Your reading comprehension is awful. Tax cuts are meaningless when you talk about them *without regard to the weight of their benefits*.
-wages are stagnant so we shouldn't bother lowering taxes on the middle class because that didn't raise their wages (in a year)
But that was the Trump/Republican justification FOR those taxes. Yes, its ridiculous, which was pointed out at the time by many economists.
-if we lower taxes on the middle class we won't be able to afford all these lockheed martin jets and designer solar panels and transvestite storytime for elementary schoolers and the government may be forced to reconsider its spending habits. keep slaving away for our washington coffers.
Its funny that you think being opposed to middle class tax cuts is such entrenched Democratic dogma that you're going off on one of your sarcastic tantrums here. If Trump proposed purely low and middle income tax cuts he'd get overwhelming support. If he'd proposed balanced tax cuts there would be some grumblings that it wasn't necessary for the wealthier Americans, but he'd still get a fair amount of bipartisan support. But what he actually proposed was a nakedly imbalanced plan favoring the wealthy. Apparently that was enough to dupe his base, partly just because they can say "hey, we got something!" and partly due to extreme gullibility of actually buying into trickle-down economics.
Btw Tax Policy Center actually is a decent source to cut through this bullshit. You'll see that their last article on their site about this was a link to the study that was the basis for the article I posted. https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/tags/tax-cuts-and-jobs-act
One important detail: Milo and JBP both fooled you. You promoted both of them as people who have important things to say because you shared a lot in common, and they both turned out to be frauds whose followers are unsurprisingly bad actors, and one of them was an open Neo-Nazi who decided to 'go underground' and who was paid to sow discord and move the Overton window even further right. If galaxy brains like you can be fooled like this, then that gives more weight to my rationale that deplatforming is a valid strategy in certain situations, doesn't it? But again, even if I was completely being misled about this, you could be a careful and intelligent human being and argue against my position without being caught pushing the far-right's agenda. It just turns out that a lot of your worldview is based around a simplistic antagonism which is the same that fuels the far-right minus the race element, and it's much easier to antagonize leftists by doing that, and that's what seduces you; you're not living if your reptilian brain isn't lighting up all the time.
Milo was just a guy who appeared in TV shows destroying feminists, I agree with those trashing, those feminist had terrible ideas, I dont consider JBP a fraud at all I think he has many valuable things to say, altho I disagree with many others.
I think I can bring a little clarity to this point between the two of us:
I assume you know who Desmond (the drag kid) is, the kid is clearly on drugs in some videos, knows how ketamine is snorted, was very likely sexually abused etc, so he is the poster boy for the right-wing to expose the degeneracy of the left, obllivious people see it and panic and think the left must be stopped, and it pisses you off that I fall for it, and do the bidding of the extreme-right correct?.Obviously this happens in many subjects, 3yo trans kids, intersectional feminism, fringe lgbt community accepting pedophiles, antifa violence etc.
The thing is, the whole Desmond thing is fucked up and needs to stop, and a big chunk of the left agrees, but can't denounce it because it would give ammo to the extreme-right and people self radicalize, and my worldviews arent based on simplistic antagonism that is just what you see because its shit that needs to be dealt with and that is what you also push, you push Desmond (in this case Antifa violence) and I say NO, and you think that defines me, but it doesnt, that is just my response to you. I think that is why you totally misjudge my positions and even think I watch Alex Jones and stuff like that.
I remember years ago Drone said to me that even if it was a fact he would deny that black people had a lower IQ than whites, and I disagreed with that position even if its one of the main talking points of the most dangerous strain of fascists, maybe I just dogmatically believe in truth and I don't fear fascists as much as you guys do.
Milo was never just that and he had nothing valuable to say about feminism just like everything else.
I've never heard of Desmond and I don't trust you or right-wing trolls to know much about his life. I also don't trust right-wingers who make a fuss about this thing to know what good parenting is. Anyway, it sounds like just another fallacy of composition. No one is exposing anything about "the left" because a kid likes to cross-dress. The belief that deviance is bad for society as a whole is not founded on any rigorous empirical evidence or logical reasoning, quite the contrary. It's called a prejudice.
It doesn't piss me off that you fall for far-right propaganda, it annoys me that you post it uncritically as news that we should know about, and I have to do the work to show that it isn't, usually because it is designed to mislead, distract and antagonize.
Yes, your worldview is based on a massive oversimplification of what 'communism' and 'socialism' are and in what flavor they come and you straw man anyone who is an anti-capitalist by pigeon-holing them and associated them with those positions you created. "Huh-huh-huh, you naive fool, keep believing North Korea is close to an utopia; why don't you go live in Venezuela!". Who the fuck has time for this shit?
You never present a clear definition of those words and just assume everyone agrees with how you're using them or they're stupid, and you constantly oppose your view of capitalism with your view of communism as a basic antagonism within society instead of looking at the elements of both of them and what their pros and cons are. Case in point: you continue to repeat that Nazism was socialist because it's in the name, duh, and you just said you think North Korea is communist and similar to both USSR and Cuba and Venezuela. This is next level wilful ignorance, and it's just completely futile to respond to someone who gets things that wrong. It's a completely meaningless association and it's rendered even more ignorant by thinking that an anarchist believes that any one of those regimes represents the world they want to live in "if you just give them a little nudge". What the actual fuck are you talking about?
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
I remember years ago Drone said to me that even if it was a fact he would deny that black people had a lower IQ than whites, and I disagreed with that position even if its one of the main talking points of the most dangerous strain of fascists, maybe I just dogmatically believe in truth and I don't fear fascists as much as you guys do.
I didn't really say that I would deny it, more that this isn't 'good' knowledge. Like there are some people who think 'all knowledge is good by default, only by misapplication can it be bad', but my opinion here is more that if this were real, it would be a piece of knowledge with no positive and a lot of very bad potential utility. And for that reason I'm negative towards say, doing research aimed to showcase different intellectual potential of different 'races'. Basically I disagree with the idea of knowledge being apolitical. (Some is, but in most cases our knowledge isn't sufficiently certain for personal interpretation to take no part in the formation or dissemination of it. )
But I do think this is an interesting and difficult discussion.
Then we agree and that information must be used very carefully but never denied, it can lead to bad situations for example in the subject of gender equality many will deny natural gender preferences in the pursuit of equal representation, and social engineering while blindfolded by dogma is going to cause serious problems.
On July 05 2019 22:21 Loco wrote:
Does Stroggoz do that? He sees the same outliers as you do, and he doesn't support the movement, but he doesn't react like you, because he's not willfully ignorant, and he doesn't actually want people to be hurt, unlike you.
Stroggoz and I have different views, I assume he seems right-wing extremist as a greater threat than left-wing extremism and I don't, we haven't had an ethno fascist dictatorship in like 70 years, but the soviet union fell in 91, we have North Korea , Cuba and Venezuela, and these will fall on deaf ears because you see these two ideologies not as both terribly destructive as I do, but one as pure evil and the other just one nudge away from utopia.
It's normal to have different views when one person keeps his head in the sand because the sunlight gets too uncomfortable. You really have no clue. North Korea's Juche has more in common with Nazism (which you think is leftist, so duh) than it does with Cuba and Venezuela. It's hypernationalist racial supremacist authoritarianism. The idea that these three share some common root ideology, and also that this ideology is the same as mine is so funny. Thank god for the Molyneux course in communism from clown school.
So NorthKorea isn't communist, brilliant thanks for the memo, the USSR was also nationalisti and authoritarian, what about them? perhaps you are saying fascism and communism aren't mutually exclusive... all right I can live with that the nazis, soviets and NKs were fasci-communist
Dave Rubin: Antifa are not fighting fascists, they are the fascists!
Stefan Molyneux: Antifa are not fascists, they are communists, even worse!
Baal: Alright, alright, antifa are fasci-communists! I don't know what the Three Arrows symbol means, but forget about that for a minute.
I remember years ago Drone said to me that even if it was a fact he would deny that black people had a lower IQ than whites, and I disagreed with that position even if its one of the main talking points of the most dangerous strain of fascists, maybe I just dogmatically believe in truth and I don't fear fascists as much as you guys do.
I didn't really say that I would deny it, more that this isn't 'good' knowledge. Like there are some people who think 'all knowledge is good by default, only by misapplication can it be bad', but my opinion here is more that if this were real, it would be a piece of knowledge with no positive and a lot of very bad potential utility. And for that reason I'm negative towards say, doing research aimed to showcase different intellectual potential of different 'races'. Basically I disagree with the idea of knowledge being apolitical. (Some is, but in most cases our knowledge isn't sufficiently certain for personal interpretation to take no part in the formation or dissemination of it. )
But I do think this is an interesting and difficult discussion.
Then we agree and that information must be used very carefully but never denied, it can lead to bad situations for example in the subject of gender equality many will deny natural gender preferences in the pursuit of equal representation, and social engineering while blindfolded by dogma is going to cause serious problems.
The whole premise that scientific knowledge just exists independently of the scientists who are using it is provably wrong. And yeah, equal representation in Rojava sure is leading to serious problems...... not.
Here's some "objective knowledge" that I'm sure you're a fan of. Would love to hear your thoughts on this one.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
On July 06 2019 19:26 Loco wrote:
Milo was never just that and he had nothing valuable to say about feminism just like everything else.
Yes he was, he never mentioned anything else when he started, and yes he had valuable thing to say, he ridiculed an ideology that neede to be publicly ridiculed.
I've never heard of Desmond and I don't trust you or right-wing trolls to know much about his life. I also don't trust right-wingers who make a fuss about this thing to know what good parenting is. Anyway, it sounds like just another fallacy of composition. No one is exposing anything about "the left" because a kid likes to cross-dress. The belief that deviance is bad for society as a whole is not founded on any rigorous empirical evidence or logical reasoning, quite the contrary. It's called a prejudice.
You have your head up so far in your ass that you can't even see an olive branch infront of you lol.
Look up Desmond, it has nothing to do with cross dressing, it has to do with drugs, pedophilia etc, and it was just one example of things the right use to rattle up centricts to perversity, I mentioned fringe LGBTQ spousing pedophilia under its umbrella, adoptive 3yo transitioning kids etc.
It doesn't piss me off that you fall for far-right propaganda, it annoys me that you post it uncritically as news that we should know about, and I have to do the work to show that it isn't, usually because it is designed to mislead, distract and antagonize.
Deviancy is constructed as social decay for conservatives, and that has been the cause for many empires as big as Rome and Babylone, to have watched so many hard right ideology that you fail to see where center-right people come from, "in before ackshually.. i understand them perfectly, they are just bigots."
Yes, your worldview is based on a massive oversimplification of what 'communism' and 'socialism' are and in what flavor they come and you straw man anyone who is an anti-capitalist by pigeon-holing them and associated them with those positions you created. "Huh-huh-huh, you naive fool, keep believing North Korea is close to an utopia; why don't you go live in Venezuela!". Who the fuck has time for this shit?
I've never said you think NK is an utopia (at least unironically), you talk a lot about unfalsifiable theories about free market when the times the closes things to your ideas have been implemented in a large scale have ended in the death of millions though, in other words, communists should shut the fuck up about empirical evidence, in their own interest.
You never present a clear definition of those words and just assume everyone agrees with how you're using them or they're stupid, and you constantly oppose your view of capitalism with your view of communism as a basic antagonism within society instead of looking at the elements of both of them and what their pros and cons are. Case in point: you continue to repeat that Nazism was socialist because it's in the name, duh, and you just said you think North Korea is communist and similar to both USSR and Cuba and Venezuela. This is next level wilful ignorance, and it's just completely futile to respond to someone who gets things that wrong. It's a completely meaningless association and it's rendered even more ignorant by thinking that an anarchist believes that any one of those regimes represents the world they want to live in "if you just give them a little nudge". What the actual fuck are you talking about?
I didn't say that Nazis were socialist because of their name, I said they were because:
- They are collectivist in nature, sacrificing the individual for the group, that is socially left wing.
- Their economic model was about the state having a tight control of the market, in fact the Nazis had to stop this process because it quickly became a problem in the war effort, but the Nazis at no point desired a free market without intervention from the state, its difficult to be authoritarian and economically right wing since a government that doesn't control the economy is weaker, and hard to be authoritarian and weak.
Cuba, Venezuela and NK are obv different, they are all different forms of left wing systems though.
On July 06 2019 19:43 Loco wrote:
The whole premise that scientific knowledge just exists independently of the scientists who are using it is provably wrong. And yeah, equal representation in Rojava sure is leading to serious problems...... not.
The goal is to be independant but its not always the truth, scientists are fallible and are no immune to biases, also people who read cientific "truths", leftwigers trend to be skeptical of medicine, vaccines etc, but accept climate change while right wingers do the opposite
Here's some "objective knowledge" that I'm sure you're a fan of. Would love to hear your thoughts on this one.
I've read Taleb Nassim criticism of IQ tests, apparently they are terrible in measuring cognitive habilities above 100, the variance is massive, for example the top 20% janitors score higher than the bottom 20% doctors, but they are accurate in below 100 scores.
So IQ is just an inaccurate measure of a small part of intelligence and it doesn't say that much, for example China has a much higher IQ than all of the western countries but they aren't remotely as prosperous so they are a key proof that IQ is very incomplete in country generalizations.
That being said I have at least 1 factory worker who is definitnelly sub 90 (yes I own a factory now, I went full monopoly-man on your ass LOL im actually belly laughing) and its a challenge, its difficult for him to follow very simple instructions, fucks up often, but he has been working for a while and is debilitating diabetes, now what do the bad bad profit-seeking capitalist do? fire him? no, I keep him because its the right thing to do.
So Jordan presents is talking about a challenge we will face that might get worse as technology advances and I think its a challenge that has to be dealt with compassion not with silencing or with systems within systems.
Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online
1
Santafairy Korea (South). Jul 07 2019 12:43. Posts 2226
On July 06 2019 16:18 Santafairy wrote:
"getting taxes cut is meaningless" this seems tone deaf, didn't someone just post a few pages ago how many households are one $400 emergency away from going broke?
Your reading comprehension is awful. Tax cuts are meaningless when you talk about them *without regard to the weight of their benefits*.
my comprehension is alright it's just no amount of literacy can help someone understand nonsense
I don't know what you're talking about "without regard to the weight of their benefits" but thanks for volunteering to explain yourself
I didn't think it changed the meaning of how stupid what you said was to add that part, so I didn't think it was important
a tax cut for someone who doesn't have money is good. especially for people whose wages aren't rising as LAtimes noted, they can save it, or spend it in the economy, both of which are healthy
do you know what meaningless means? it means: without meaning, having no meaning
it seems like you're saying that a tax cut for a middle class family, is meaningless, if GDP or wages or unemployment or any other macroeconomic stats don't change to the amount predicted by the people who sold you the tax cut bill
or that a tax cut for a middle class family, is meaningless, if a richer person also got a tax cut, or if corporate tax was decreased. is that right? what you meant?
again thanks for explaining your position (I honestly think you don't know what you believe because you don't even have facts straight to begin with to form an opinion) like an adult so I don't have to guess
-if we lower taxes on the middle class we won't be able to afford all these lockheed martin jets and designer solar panels and transvestite storytime for elementary schoolers and the government may be forced to reconsider its spending habits. keep slaving away for our washington coffers.
Its funny that you think being opposed to middle class tax cuts is such entrenched Democratic dogma that you're going off on one of your sarcastic tantrums here. If Trump proposed purely low and middle income tax cuts he'd get overwhelming support. If he'd proposed balanced tax cuts there would be some grumblings that it wasn't necessary for the wealthier Americans, but he'd still get a fair amount of bipartisan support. But what he actually proposed was a nakedly imbalanced plan favoring the wealthy. Apparently that was enough to dupe his base, partly just because they can say "hey, we got something!" and partly due to extreme gullibility of actually buying into trickle-down economics.
I'm just connecting the dots and responding to the LAtimes article you posted. 65% of people saw a tax cut and that's bad because government needs revenue and their valuable revenues went down... 0.4%. I'm guessing you bringing up the Democratic party now is you revealing you've adopted their memetic conception of the Trump administration's tax plan: that it was just tax cuts for the rich, muh trickle-down economics, blahblah, same old political bullshit, without realizing the actual number of 65% of people having lower taxes BECAUSE THE LATIMES JOURNALISTS CONVENIENTLY OMITTED IT. I would definitely say it's Democratic dogma to reflexively oppose anything Trump does, in this case middle class tax cuts, which is why your original statement still doesn't make sense to me. Tax millionaires and repeal Trump tax cuts. Why would you repeal middle class tax cuts. Maybe it's the right thing to do but can you explain? Or did you just not know what you were talking about when you posted that? Because if you wanted bigger tax cuts for the lower and middle class I don't understand why you would say "repeal" Trump's cuts, and not "extend" them or "increase" or "expand" them, repealing means to take something away, so in the case of the tax cuts you now claim to want it would be in the opposite direction. So yes, I think you just swallowed a 40 year old Democratic talking point as fact.
yeah if people realized their taxes went down they'd probably be a lot happier so we better make sure not to tell them, just keep telling them Republicans are the devil
and we didn't measure any miraculous macroeconomic effects after... 1 year. now maybe I'm an idiot, but this was the first year that people didn't pay the taxes, which means now 2019 is the year that the actual money is free and circulating, that would have been collected in taxes under the previous system. so if there were effects or not would you expect to see them before now anyway?
seems like the most you could say about that is, the tax cuts didn't perform to such and such expectations, and deficit grew like 5% but apart from that is there any argument against them?
little measurable effect means good or bad, yes?
I get that there is this theoretical (imaginary) amazing tax plan that every side wants, whether it's Bernie's or Cruz's or whatever. but the fact that this tax plan is not that one, doesn't make that shit.
On July 06 2019 18:35 NMcNasty wrote:
Btw Tax Policy Center actually is a decent source to cut through this bullshit. You'll see that their last article on their site about this was a link to the study that was the basis for the article I posted. https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/tags/tax-cuts-and-jobs-act
yeah tax policy center they're decent, they say 65% of people paid less in taxes and 6% paid more
It seems to be not very profitable in the long run to play those kind of hands. - Gus Hansen
The new "anti-casseurs" laws that Macron is pushing through the French legislature will legalize the repressive practices used against the Yellow Vests, as well as make them permanently available to his successors - for example, Marine Le Pen. The statutes have nothing to do with actual casseurs - they are breaking existing laws and need only apprehension under them - and everything to do with making it nearly impossible for ecologists, trade-unionists, and Yellow Vests to freely assemble and demonstrate.
Say you're a small-town Yellow Vest who takes the train to Paris on a Saturday. You're likely to be stopped several times between the station and the Champs-Elysees. If in your pack you have Vaseline, eye drops, ski goggles, a bicycle helmet, a face-scarf, or - god forbid - a gas mask, you can be arrested, whisked to summary trial, and convicted the same day for assisting a "group organized for the purpose of destroying public order and obstructing the forces of order."
- Adbusters July/August 2019
1
NMcNasty United States. Jul 07 2019 19:59. Posts 2039
On July 07 2019 11:43 Santafairy wrote:
my comprehension is alright it's just no amount of literacy can help someone understand nonsense
You know exactly what I mean, I'm actually going to give you enough credit here and assume you're stubbornly flailing instead of being learning disabled enough to not actually understand my point.
But just in case, here it is again in Kindergarten terms:
If you give 9 people $1, and then you give one person $10, and then someone says 'that's not fair!', saying in response 'It is fair! Everyone is getting money!' is stupid.
a tax cut for someone who doesn't have money is good. especially for people whose wages aren't rising as LAtimes noted, they can save it, or spend it in the economy, both of which are healthy
Yes, tax cuts for poor families are much better and more effective than tax cuts for rich families, but Trump and the Republicans got this exactly backwards. The tax cuts are heavily weighted toward rich families who are less likely to spend it, meaning its less likely to be useful for economic growth (which again, is their justification for the cuts).
it seems like you're saying that a tax cut for a middle class family, is meaningless, if GDP or wages or unemployment or any other macroeconomic stats don't change to the amount predicted by the people who sold you the tax cut bill
or that a tax cut for a middle class family, is meaningless, if a richer person also got a tax cut, or if corporate tax was decreased. is that right? what you meant?
No, its not right, its not what I meant, you're strawmanning and trolling here.
I'm just connecting the dots and responding to the LAtimes article you posted. 65% of people saw a tax cut and that's bad because government needs revenue and their valuable revenues went down... 0.4%. I'm guessing you bringing up the Democratic party now is you revealing you've adopted their memetic conception of the Trump administration's tax plan: that it was just tax cuts for the rich, muh trickle-down economics, blahblah, same old political bullshit, without realizing the actual number of 65% of people having lower taxes BECAUSE THE LATIMES JOURNALISTS CONVENIENTLY OMITTED IT.
Yeah without regard to weight. You're tripling down on your simplicity and adding caps lock. No where so far have you ever addressed whether the cuts overwhelming favored the wealthy, you're just stuck on a loop pointing out that everyone (as in 65%) got cuts, which is disputed depending on the source you use.
I would definitely say it's Democratic dogma to reflexively oppose anything Trump does, in this case middle class tax cuts, which is why your original statement still doesn't make sense to me. Tax millionaires and repeal Trump tax cuts. Why would you repeal middle class tax cuts.
Trump tax cuts aren't 'middle class tax cuts'. At best they're tax cuts for wealthy where the middle class was thrown a bone. Repealing Trump tax cuts, and then passing middle class tax cuts would be reasonable. Repealing the cuts for wealthy and leaving what the middle class has would also be reasonable.
So yes, I think you just swallowed a 40 year old Democratic talking point as fact.
Again, its laughable that you think Democrats have been historically opposed to middle class tax cuts. Bill Clinton and Obama cut middle classes. Hillary Clinton proposed cutting taxes for the middle class. These are just things that happened.
and we didn't measure any miraculous macroeconomic effects after... 1 year. now maybe I'm an idiot, but this was the first year that people didn't pay the taxes, which means now 2019 is the year that the actual money is free and circulating, that would have been collected in taxes under the previous system. so if there were effects or not would you expect to see them before now anyway?
Again its part of the Republican belief system that tax cuts instantly and magically supercharge the economy. Not the fault of people that point out that its ludicrous and didn't work.
seems like the most you could say about that is, the tax cuts didn't perform to such and such expectations, and deficit grew like 5% but apart from that is there any argument against them?
Revenue loss is not some side issue in regard to tax cuts. I mean FWIW I am actually opposed to middle class tax cuts at the moment due to revenue loss. Debt and deficit are massive and there are seriously issues that need addressing (like climate change). The economy is doing fairly well I don't buy that the middle class (not lower) desperately needs relief. Theoretically I can see how in bad economies taxes should be cut to the jump-start the economy (and take on a deficit), but then in good economies taxes should be raised in order to pay debt off. What we have though is Republicans pushing for tax cuts regardless of the economy or their spending plans. They'll lie through their teeth about who benefits, which unfortunately works, people are still gullible enough to believe them.
"You can't see an olive branch when its extended to you!"
"I'm not misrepresenting you and I don't believe in an oversimplifying antagonism between capitalism and communism"
2 minutes later:
"Your ideology has killed millions of people, shut the fuck up"
lol
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
That last part was regarding that you say the free market can never exist and it corrupts into this, and I think that is an ironically stupid argument for somebody pushing for marxism.
The olive branch was regarding right-wing propaganda which I thought we could find some common ground, I was trying to explain the process where the right wing manipulates the centrists, which is a big talking point from the left who considers centrists as useful idiots for fascists
So, again: "Everything that's not capitalism is authoritarian communism (why even say 'marxism' now?) and I am not simplifying anything at all that's just how it goes." - Baal
It's almost like all this time you've hidden that you believe in cultural Marxism. Everyone is either possessed by Marx and doesn't know it or they are deliberately being sneaky and trying to convert you to Marxism by lying about their beliefs. This is your universe of possibilities, like Molyneux. Anarchists simply don't exist; that is, people who push for decentralization and face to face democracy don't really believe in it and they don't have a working model: we're all secretly tankies who can't wait to give you the wall, or we are hanging out in Christiania smoking dope and eventually we'll wake up to the inevitable fact that capitalism is the end of history and just adjust. You know all that evidence that shows that anarchism works, and that as far as we can see it's the only way to save human civilization? Never mind that, just look at North Korea instead, that is true leftism folks, nothing to see here! Let the overlords, I mean, the philanthropists take care of everything and stop worrying so much.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
sigh, you are making very difficult to discuss in good faith.
I said that its gets progressivly more difficult for a state to be authoritarian the more economically right they go, having no control of the economy gives less tool for control and authority to the state, I think that is pretty obvious, that doesn't mean that in contrast anything on the left has to be authoritarian, I didnt say that.
I said marxist because it encompasses socialism and communism, the nazis never intended to give the means of production to the people, so they weren't communists.
WTF, when did I ever said anything remotely like cultural marxism about converting people and being deceptive?, I've never denied the existence of anarchists or said your beliefs were not valid (you are the one who constantly does that to me).
You said that the free market is an unfalsifiable fairy tale, because it inevitably corrupts to THIS, which is a good argument but for a cynical realist, but its an astonishing ironic argument for somebody who holds your political beliefs.
I never said capitalism is the end of story, in fact I said that when we reach a post-scarcity future its very likely some form of collectivism would be better, hard to say for sure though, its already difficult enough to especulate what system is best on our time.
Anarchy being the only way to save human civilization? Wow, do you literally mean this?
I've read Taleb Nassim criticism of IQ tests, apparently they are terrible in measuring cognitive habilities above 100, the variance is massive, for example the top 20% janitors score higher than the bottom 20% doctors, but they are accurate in below 100 scores.
Problem is Taleb completely disregards IQ as any type of factor and ignores data that doesn't suit him. I mostly agree with him since we don't really understand what exactly does it measures and is sort of a test that bases its arguments on the data from results, even though there is no data provoking the source of the test, but you can't ignore some statistics - more on that when I have more than 3 minutes to spend
Then again JP is a complete moron
Last edit: 08/07/2019 09:42
1
Stroggoz New Zealand. Jul 08 2019 10:42. Posts 5296
first time i completed a JP video. His argument at the end is remarkable to say the least; people with low IQ can't be taught to be problem solvers? What's the point of mass education then, i wonder. I love how the interviewer kinda casts some very mild criticism and doubt towards the end and JP just doubles down on his statement. JP is the guy that the liberal media has praised as one of the great genius's of our time, and the head of department at harvard psychology praised his work as illimunating lol.
As for IQ tests they have all sorts of functions, they used to be 'proofs' for eugenics and anti-immigration nativism in the 1920's, that is not so popular anymore apart from maybe the bell curve, so they are mostly just an ego test. If you take one and think it means you're smart, you've been tested positive for having an ego.
One of 3 non decent human beings on a site of 5 people with between 2-3 decent human beings
On July 08 2019 09:42 Stroggoz wrote:
first time i completed a JP video. His argument at the end is remarkable to say the least; people with low IQ can't be taught to be problem solvers? What's the point of mass education then, i wonder. I love how the interviewer kinda casts some very mild criticism and doubt towards the end and JP just doubles down on his statement. JP is the guy that the liberal media has praised as one of the great genius's of our time, and the head of department at harvard psychology praised his work as illimunating lol.
As for IQ tests they have all sorts of functions, they used to be 'proofs' for eugenics and anti-immigration nativism in the 1920's, that is not so popular anymore apart from maybe the bell curve, so they are mostly just an ego test. If you take one and think it means you're smart, you've been tested positive for having an ego.
There are so many things wrong with that video, he moves from one non-sequitur to the next, and it's all premised on the idea the military is a representation of society and human functioning as a whole.... which is just taken as self-evident. This coming from a guy with a self-proclaimed "over 160 IQ".
It would be hilarious if it wasn't such blatant dog whistling for Bell Curve pushing 'race realists'. It's no surprise though, we know he's an essentialist when it comes to gender and other things, and he's had these discussions with open racists like Molyneux before and didn't push back on it. It's also hilarious when these people pretend like this "truth" is so damaging and it personally hurt them when they learned about it, like when Molyneux went on the Rubin show and made this whole theatrical performance about how some races are genetically inferior to him and he felt completely devastated emotionally when he learned about it. Peterson is doing something similar here, and just trying to keep plausible deniability for saying that there is no good solution, implying that between social Darwinism and a welfare state there's no clear winner.
Then you have perhaps the ultimate irony: he had Norman Doidge write his last book's preface. Doidge is pretty famous for his book on neuroplasticity. It takes several cases of people who had severe trauma to the head, or congenital cognitive problems, and it shows that because of neuroplasticity they can regain lost functions or become really good at certain tasks if they train for it. Some of the cases are really incredible.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
Last edit: 08/07/2019 19:36
1
blackjacki2 United States. Jul 08 2019 20:03. Posts 2581
The podcast show Radiolab just came out with a series based on race / IQ tests. The idea was kicked off by a Reddit TIL thread of "TIL it's illegal in the state of California for a school to give an IQ test to a black child." It goes into the history of IQ testing of students, the actual black student that ended up suing the state and the court ruling of IQ tests being used as a measure to segregate schools/classrooms.
I think it's incredibly important for schools to segregate their classrooms based off of intelligence/ability. If intelligent students share a classroom with unintelligent students the teacher will have to dumb down the curriculum and re-explain simple concepts. The intelligent students will be held back and our society as a whole will be worse off.
However if there is indeed a difference between the races in intelligence then segregating students based off of intelligence would de facto be segregating them by race. Then you have to ask what's the worse evil, racially segregating the classrooms or dumbing down the classrooms to the lowest common denominator?
United States. Jul 06 2019 19:35. Posts 2039
