Regular meditation and visualization exercises along with CBT are good pillars. One thing in particular is pretty powerful for me, it consists of exerting myself physically and ideally exhausting myself prior to an event that I'm anxious about. Panic attacks take a lot of energy out of you, and what I found is that if you can burn that energy prior or even during, it prevents or terminates it.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
Yeah, I have a job interview tomorrow and I am looking to go buck shit wild in the gym tomorrow morning. It will be interesting to see. The panic developed specifically in AA meetings (although I have had panic attacks and panic in the past). I think part of it is that I feel like a "fake" in there since there is so much I don't agree with at this point. It's almost impossible for me to carry a message in a meeting because I don't really agree with the message. So, I actually don't care that I haven't been going to meetings it has been a good thing for me (even though my entire social circle thinks I'm crazy). I am just a bit anxious about the job interview tomorrow because I don't want to panic there too and then panic that I am going to panic for every job interview. As I'm sure you know there is nothing worse than panicking at just the wrong time. When the heart starts to race and it is like your throat is closing off, and there is just a tightness in all of the muscles and the vision gets a bit whoozy.... ugh. Fuck, I'm motivated to destroy myself tomorrow in the gym.
ps, I will be lifting to Dead Congregation tomorrow morning. I remember my last back workout to them I went into a trance and turned into a werewolf and blacked out. I will try and top that tomorrow. There will be no fucks given for anatomy tomorrow. It's pure energy and exertion. I'm already starting to turn super saiyan listening to this concert.
Also, while 'real' socialism aims for the classless society, that's not the equivalent of completely abolished hierarchy.
You are totally right, my data was way off I should have checked before posting I read a lot of articles about scandinavian suicide rates being one of the worst (obv always behind japan) but it seems there are many other countries worse.
Ditto on that part, capitalism is one tiny way we have hierarchies, some people are smarter, more attractive, more charismatic, better spoken and hundreds of qualities that define one's suble ranking in society.
It is very much about capitalism, hierarchy in and of itself makes people sick, and capitalism has drastic inequality built into it. In the words of the brilliant neuroscientist and stress-health expert Robert Sapolsky, “It isn’t [just] about being poor, it is about feeling poor.” It's something few people realize but relative poverty or deprivation is a massive driver of mental health issues separate from extreme poverty.
Again correlation =/= causation, do you see another pattern there?
Becauase I see a strong race homogenity pattern there so... are you advocating for an ethnostate now too because there is a correlation?
For a guy who rants about the nuances of complex problems you sure love to simplify when it suits your dogmatic views.
Men who adhere to traditionally masculine cultural norms, such as risk-taking, violence, dominance, primacy of work, disdain for homosexuality, need for emotional control, desire to win, and pursuit of social status, tend to be more likely to experience psychological problems such as depression, stress, body image problems, substance abuse, and poor social functioning.[16] The effect tends to be stronger in men who also emphasize "toxic" masculine norms, such as self-reliance, seeking power over women, and sexual promiscuity or "playboy" behavior.
It's complex but when I stopped adhering to those norms my psychological problems went away (I experienced all of them before). Even doing something like racing to the gym to compete with everyone in there my body image problems come back. When I was a big man in poker or a big man in the steel mills I had all of the problems.
"I'm the man and your the man and he's the man as well so why don't you stick that fucking finger up your assssssss!"
It is very much about capitalism, hierarchy in and of itself makes people sick, and capitalism has drastic inequality built into it. In the words of the brilliant neuroscientist and stress-health expert Robert Sapolsky, “It isn’t [just] about being poor, it is about feeling poor.” It's something few people realize but relative poverty or deprivation is a massive driver of mental health issues separate from extreme poverty.
Again correlation =/= causation, do you see another pattern there?
Becauase I see a strong race homogenity pattern there so... are you advocating for an ethnostate now too because there is a correlation?
For a guy who rants about the nuances of complex problems you sure love to simplify when it suits your dogmatic views.
Once again you fail to get the argument right and you throw ad hominems as soon as you realize you are out of your depth and you can't back up your views with evidence. Your claim was that the correlation between social inequality and suicide (meaning mental health, which you had gotten wrong in the previous argument) was weak. Now that you have been shown to be wrong--this is a very strong correlation and it has been replicated--you are moving the goal post by saying that epidemiological studies can't definitely prove my thesis, it's "just a correlation". You want something causal that makes the big picture even more clear? There you go, in short video format to suit your attention span.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
- I still take risks but not nearly like I used to. I used to easily be in the top 1% of risk taking.
- I haven't been violent since BJJ which is a much better outlet than street fighting. If you are doing BJJ or MMA there is no longer a reason to be violent outside of the sport.
- I would say I am dominant in some circumstances and subordinate in others. Not worrying too much about it. The only time I would be out and out submissive is if this dominatrix on tinder matches with me and it works out. I have always wanted to try that but I am usually dominant in bed.
- I always wanted to be the FBI agent, Phil Ivey, James Bond with emotional control. Now, I can watch a "Carmina Burana" ballet and let the tears just stream down my face with no shame. It's liberating. I don't have to be perfect.
- I was raised on Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods. Two GREAT role models....................... I still have a desire to win. It's not nearly as hyper-extreme as it used to be but there is a burning still there inside of me. I am not sure what to do about it and I am not convinced it's a bad thing.
- I more so pursue respect than status these days but of course I would like to be held in high regard among a social sphere. The problem is I am a bit of a misfit so if I had a goal it would just be to be a respectable misfit or I have to find other misfits. I certainly don't care what the bourgeois poshlust think about me anymore. In fact, I shouldn't even care what the job interviewer thinks about me today. Either it will be a good fit or it won't and I can go on with my day and go on my vacation on Tuesday.
It is very much about capitalism, hierarchy in and of itself makes people sick, and capitalism has drastic inequality built into it. In the words of the brilliant neuroscientist and stress-health expert Robert Sapolsky, “It isn’t [just] about being poor, it is about feeling poor.” It's something few people realize but relative poverty or deprivation is a massive driver of mental health issues separate from extreme poverty.
Again correlation =/= causation, do you see another pattern there?
Becauase I see a strong race homogenity pattern there so... are you advocating for an ethnostate now too because there is a correlation?
For a guy who rants about the nuances of complex problems you sure love to simplify when it suits your dogmatic views.
Once again you fail to get the argument right and you throw ad hominems as soon as you realize you are out of your depth and you can't back up your views with evidence. Your claim was that the correlation between social inequality and suicide (meaning mental health, which you had gotten wrong in the previous argument) was weak. Now that you have been shown to be wrong--this is a very strong correlation and it has been replicated--you are moving the goal post by saying that epidemiological studies can't definitely prove my thesis, it's "just a correlation". You want something causal that makes the big picture even more clear? There you go, in short video format to suit your attention span.
You didn't prove even a weak correlation between suicide and income inequality and yet you talk like you proved a strong correlation between suicide and capitalism.
Now you are changing the tone from suicide to mental health because that data suits your narrative arent you buddy? Intellectual dishonesty 101.
These are the countries with the lowest suicide rates:
So lets play the correlation game shall we?, what I deduct is that what prevents suicide is: massive income inequality, religious fanaticism and pretty beaches.
The ad-hominems are because you have dragged discussions to your obtuse dogmatic beliefs because you have devolved into cliché that looks everything through the lens of opression dynamics that sees capitalism as the root of all evil, civil discourse is out of the window, this is just shit flinging.
I made no prior claims about suicide dude. How about you first quote me before calling me intellectually dishonest for changing the topic? RiKD is the one who posted the suicide increase news. What I initially said in response to it is that the most interesting finding in that report is that over half of those people didn't have a known mental health condition. You and I were not in an argument at that time. You then replied saying "you idiots are wrong" and attacked me as if I had made a specific claim about suicide rates when my claims were about the rise in mental health issues and later on its strong link to inequality. I don't know why you think the ultimate public health metric we should pay attention to are completed suicides and everything else is irrelevant, but yeah, it is a completely pointless discussion... thanks for that.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
Here's the little I'll actually say on suicide. Suicide is a form of violence (self-violence) and so it should be looked at as part of a global picture on violence. When you can't take your aggression out on others, and you can't flee from what makes you miserable and inhibited, you can only turn your aggression towards yourself. This happens when someone's BIS (behavioral inhibition system) has been activated for a long time, which has stimulated the neuroendocrine responses that lead to negative health consequences (i.e. the body is constantly flooded with damaging stress hormones). It is the "ultimate act" that had a whole series of chain reactions that preceded it. You're not interested in those chain reactions, their link to structural causes, probably because you're too afraid your entire ideology would collapse if it turns out that dominance hierarchies and inequality are the main driver. Not the only driver, but the main driver. It would force you to either give it up or revert to a crude social Darwinism to justify it and you can't square it. It's better to stay ignorant, stable and happy, right?
"A consensus on the causes and prevention of violence has been emerging over the past few decades among investigators of this subject from virtually every branch of the behavioral sciences. All specialties, independent of each other, have identified a pathogen that seems to be necessary but not sufficient cause of violent behavior, just as specifically as exposure to the tubercle bacillus is necessary but not sufficient for the development of tuberculosis. The difference is that in the case of violence, the pathogen is an emotion, not a microbe—namely, the experience of overwhelming shame and humiliation. And just as people’s vulnerability to tuberculosis is influenced by the state of their body’s defense mechanisms, so their vulnerability to violence is influenced by the state of their psychological defense mechanisms."
Turns out that most people can't be at the top and they get to feel a lot of shame and humiliation as a result of being perpetually subordinate, especially when they realize how rigged it is against them... something that only gets worse the more unequal (i.e. the more ''free'') the economic system is. Who would have thunk?
[...]
“Worldwide, the most powerful predictor of the murder rate is the size of the gap in income and wealth between the rich and the poor. The most powerful predictor of the rate of national or collective violence—war, civil insurrection, and terrorism—is the size of the gap between income and wealth between the rich and poor nations.”
- Dr. James Gilligan, a lifelong prison psychologist and former director of the Center for the Study of Violence at Harvard Medical School
Something more: "Dr. Gilligan was brought in as the Medical Director of the Massachusetts prison mental hospital in Bridgewater, Massachusetts because of the high suicide and murder rates within their prisons. When he left ten years later the rates of both had dropped to nearly zero." But I'm sure you as a poker player know a lot more about violence and inequality than he does.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
"Suicide, something our intuition would peg as a very personal, detached act of “free will,” is very much a public-health problem because of its population-level predictability in reaction to certain social preconditions. While it is often difficult to determine why a given individual commits suicide, the socioeconomic correlations are undeniable. For example, suicides can be directly correlated with inevitable outcomes of the “boom and bust” cycle of economic growth and recession. A study produced by the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and University of Oxford, using data from Canada, the US, and twenty-four EU nations, found that an additional 10,000 suicides were linked to the global recession between 2008 and 2010. The study found the biggest risk factors were job loss, home repossession, and debt. Coauthor David Stuckler stated with respect to the economic correlation, “Suicides are just the tip of the iceberg . . . these data reveal a looming mental health crisis in Europe and North America. In these hard economic times, this research suggests it is critical to look for ways of protecting those who are likely to be hardest hit.” This data is corroborated by a more dramatic 2015 study, which found that about 46,000 suicides across sixty-three countries were associated with unemployment in 2008 alone, also due to the global financial crisis."
On June 11 2018 13:57 Loco wrote:
a whole series of chain reactions that preceded it. You're not interested in those chain reactions, their link to structural causes, probably because you're too afraid your entire ideology would collapse if it turns out that dominance hierarchies and inequality are the main driver. Not the only driver, but the main driver. It would force you to either give it up or revert to a crude social Darwinism to justify it and you can't square it. It's better to stay ignorant, stable and happy, right?
Of course not, as I've said many times capitalism is flawed but its the best system in a society with finite resources and flawed people, perhaps in a more abundant future in a more advanced society collectivism makes more sense.
What I'm attacking here is the weak correlation game you both are playing, as I said for someone who likes to talk about nuances ad nauseum you shure like to make the silliest simplifications when it suits you.
Turns out that most people can't be at the top and they get to feel a lot of shame and humiliation as a result of being perpetually subordinate, especially when they realize how rigged it is against them... something that only gets worse the more unequal (i.e. the more ''free'') the economic system is. Who would have thunk?
You are wrong to think that the more free a market is the more unequal it is.
Top 20 countries by income inequalilty (gini):
Top 20 countries by economic freedom:
Any correlations there bud?
Actually what that top 20 list of inequality have in common is a strong presence of the state in the economic side, they are actually more mercantilists than capitalists, and the government involvement not only increases wealth inequality it greatly reduces class mobility.
As you can see Mexico is in there and just as a quick example, Carlos Slim, ranked the richest man in the world a couple of years ago made his fortune through the state, telecomunications was nationalized (as you probably would love lol), one day the government decided to "sell" it and they gave it to him who obviously had dirty ties with the goverment, and bam... a few years later richest man in the world, is this free market?
You mentioned the 2008 meltdown a couple of times and I think its imprtant to clarify that crisis was caused by the government, they created a moral hazard while guaranteeing B and C rating mortgage loans that naturally wallstreet exploited... so the government after causing the crisis, they bailed out their buddies, so as I said, in that move alone they increased wealth inequality and also by preventing them to go bust they froze class mobility.
You constantly keep blaming capitalism for the mistakes of the state, thats the reason why I'm an anarchist.
Stroggoz New Zealand. Jul 04 2018 04:54. Posts 5296
baal you are out of your depth, study some dam economic history instead of grabbing charts from right wing think tanks to try and prove a point. The heritage institute uses the term economic freedom in an ideological way, it's really about freedom for the investor. Economic freedom for workers has gone down in New Zealand over the past 40 years, as is true for most countries on that top 20 list, but that doesn't count in the heritages definition of economic freedom.
Those nations in africa and south america that have huge inequality have had structural adjustment programs imposed on them by the unholy trinity: WTO, IMF, World bank. Structural adjustment means policy directed away from nationalization of assets-which is what third world countries have often tried to do. Structural adjustment means privatization, and opening up the economy for foreign investment. I suspect they rank lower on freedom because of the high rate of corruption in them, but they have had structural adjustment programs to turn them into markets, under the dubious argument of comparative advantage. But also economies have shifted towards privatisation in both the rich and poor nations, inequality has increased in every country. So study some economic history and get a full picture of the situation before taking one chart and claiming expertise, or u can at least read the wiki page on structural adjustment
Loco was saying that the more capitalist is a country the more inequality and I proved him wrong.
If what Loco said was true, then we would see the most capitalistic countries with the highest Gini coefficient, but we dont, in fact we see almost the opposite, the more unequal countries are african and southamerican, countries with little economic freedom, most not capitalist bur mercantilists with a strong state presence, which proves my point which is that while indeed the free-market naturally creates inequality, the biggest catalyst for it its the state.
I'm also against the "unholy trinity" as you call them fwiw... but we obv disagree in privatization.
Need help !
so im kinda getting bored of life and how things are going, for the last 4 or 5 months ive just been sitting here in my room grinding out poker.. and just taking care of the basics, saving up money to move out. But im getting very bored, and its taking a toll on me, i just feel like i really need to make a change in my life... i duno if i should go somewhere. I have a good car i could use to travel, but not much money, i have my roll thats at about 3K and like a hundred in cash in my pocket.. nothing in the bank... also dont have a passport yet.
anyway thats where i stand, like i said, i duno if i should go somewhere. maybe go out and try and find a cool job? get a new hobby? i just really want a change, i feel like this grind is just taking over my life..
btw this isnt a depressed running bad thread, im feeling great, just taking a look back and thinking i would really like to do something different..
if anyone has any good ideas, GIVE ME THEM.
Facebook
Han:Today, we live under a dictatorship of neoliberalism. In neoliberalism, everybody is an entrepreneur of themselves. In Marx’ day, capitalism had a completely different work structure. The economy consisted of factory owners and factory workers, and no factory worker was an entrepreneur of themselves. There was external exploitation. Today, we exploit ourselves – I exploit myself under the illusion that I am expressing myself.
ZEIT Wissen: The term neoliberalism is therefore frequently seen as a left wing weapon.
Han: That’s not correct. Neoliberalism describes the state of current society very well, because it’s about exploiting freedom. The system strives towards increasing productivity, and so it switches from exploiting others to exploiting the self, because this generates more efficiency and more productivity, all under the guise of freedom.
United States. Jun 10 2018 02:19. Posts 8535
).
