Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[Brew 3044]

4 minutes ago, ADHD said:

It's the truth man. Sorry. I think Jesus basically said the same stuff btw. 

And your upward mobility shit is bullshit. Nearly every super rich person in the United States is white and male. From Harvard and Yale.

 

Your version of upward mobility is horse shit. Upward mobility is the ability to move up the ladder, not necessarily the ability to move to the top of the ladder although there are a number in the tech world skipping straight to the top. I have no thought of hitting the last step on the upward mobility ladder, but if I can settle in the upper/middle steps I’m good. I have a lot more clients that built it rather than received it, although that may swing as the generations change hands. It’s taken rolling the dice a few times more than a lot of people are willing to, but that’s the opportunity. You can’t do that anywhere else.

[Smax 3799]

5 minutes ago, Doc Reeves said:

True, but money should not impede your realization of certain God given rights that have been defined by modern society for every member.

Weather you are a winner or loser should be irrelevant when it comes to say, your right to a fair trial. We all know that’s not the case.

 

Right to a fair trial is a god given right? I find it more a societal/moralistic construct but not sure what that has to do with the the discussion at hand. 

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, ADHD said:

It's the truth man. Sorry. I think Jesus basically said the same stuff btw. 

And your upward mobility shit is bullshit. Nearly every super rich person in the United States is white and male. From Harvard and Yale.

 

horseshit and the definition of upward mobility doesn't mean every poor person in this country is going to grow up and own a G5, mansions on the coasts and fleet of exoctics 

[Doc Reeves 6434]

Just now, Smax said:

 

Right to a fair trial is a god given right? I find it more a societal/moralistic construct but not sure what that has to do with the the discussion at hand. 

What kind of construct do you think capitalism is? 

[ADHD 28]

I was Born at Harvard Yard. I know what I'm talking about. Those people pay no price for their indescretions and they're set up for life. Once you are in, you are in. It's an aristocracy. All this skull & bones shit is just a reproduction of England. "new York", "New England", I mean come on, it's obvious there is no literal democracy. Or fairness or equality. 3/5ths for gsakes! That was encoded into the Constitution.

America was built by genocide and slavery. We still have slaves making all our junky products and our top industries are fuel and weapons. Outside of that, we are a service economy (lower class) bolstering mass media technology (upper & middle class) which is just military spycraft.

Wall St is just fucking gambling. So I guess the alternative route is the Mafia. See the President of the United States.

Before that, guy from Harvard. Before that, guy from Yale. Before that, guy from Yale (and Oxford).

Btw the keypoint re AOC you need to recognize is not her dancing. It's the fact she went to Boston U.

This is change!

(Hillary went to Yale)

[ADHD 28]

3 minutes ago, Smax said:

 

Right to a fair trial is a god given right? I find it more a societal/moralistic construct but not sure what that has to do with the the discussion at hand. 

 

 

 

horseshit and the definition of upward mobility doesn't mean every poor person in this country is going to grow up and own a G5, mansions on the coasts and fleet of exoctics 

They Cannot. Upward mobility has a ceiling. Did you fucking listen to anything Hillary was saying!

[Smax 3799]

5 minutes ago, Doc Reeves said:

What kind of construct do you think capitalism is? 

Never thought about it but something similar, I do know unlike communism and socialism, it works 

 

 

2 minutes ago, ADHD said:

They Cannot. Upward mobility has a ceiling. Did you fucking listen to anything Hillary was saying!

You're an idiot troll, welcome to my ignore list

[ADHD 28]

10 minutes ago, Brew said:

Your version of upward mobility is horse shit. Upward mobility is the ability to move up the ladder, not necessarily the ability to move to the top of the ladder although there are a number in the tech world skipping straight to the top. I have no thought of hitting the last step on the upward mobility ladder, but if I can settle in the upper/middle steps I’m good. I have a lot more clients that built it rather than received it, although that may swing as the generations change hands. It’s taken rolling the dice a few times more than a lot of people are willing to, but that’s the opportunity. You can’t do that anywhere else.

Right. Nobility and Feudalism.

This is what America was all about. The merchant class wanted to be as privileged as the nobles, so they joined them, kind of, in America and then established a new ceiling. Vanderbilts, Rockefellers and Carnegie Mellons etc.

Robber barons! Busted by The Roosevelts. How ironic.

"Irish (Jews, italians, blacks, women, gays, native Americans, Hispanics, Chinese) need not apply" is what I'm talking about. And the Kennedy's were killed. Damn Catholics.

Edited January 5, 2019 by ADHD

[RomaVicta 29756]

3 hours ago, retread said:

 

 

2 hours ago, HenryJames said:

 

 

8 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Talk about your devastating contrasts. What looks like the future to you? 

Her twitter game is second to none. Her twitter ripostes elevate the medium. 

"GOP lost entitlement to policing women’s behavior a long time ago. Next."

I say, god-damn! 

I don't know how her policy positions will develop over time, but I support this person whole heartedly.

Edited January 5, 2019 by RomaVicta

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

32 minutes ago, ADHD said:

And btw. I'm a Clinton capitalist, a huge fan of the FBI, I love Federalism, Patton was a god & I think West Point is cool af.

And the perfect American is this guy:

However, it's time for "the new" to take over the world. If they don't, the American Experiment and the health of the planet entire is doomed.

Yes, Democracy needs to re invent itself from time to time and evolve as a system.  Now is a time for that to happen.  We're at a crossroads in technology, resources and changing demographics.

[ADHD 28]

AOC⚡DC is a quantum leap. Back to Pocahontas. And thus the rich white patriarchy is scared shitless.

Along comes Brett Kavanaugh and BUILD THE WALL LOCK HER UP WITCH HUNT is the sum total of this entire sub forum.

What I'm talking about is inarguable.

I like Beer! PAAAARTY!!! IS A SUPREME COURT JUDGE. 

bullshit on your American Dream brochures. Bull fn shit.

[ADHD 28]

This is America:

 

 

[ADHD 28]

That last one is global warming.

[Doc Reeves 6434]

32 minutes ago, Smax said:

Never thought about it but something similar, I do know unlike communism and socialism, it works 

No one is disputing that, just pointing out it works better for some than others. Not great in a country where we are all supposed to be equal.

[Dahobbs 17420]

2 hours ago, Smax said:

 

 

whats the point of this rational?

I mean would you guys be happy and just STFU up about incomes if the wealthy of the world #wedidntdoitonourown

Perspective? I have done well myself. Some of it was effort. A lot of it was luck. I know that things could have turned out differently, and therefore I support to legislation to help people when that inevitably happens.

We want people taking some risks. We dont want the consequences of not succeeding to be so severe as to prevent all risk taking and thus punishing people for taking actions that our economy depends upon.  

[Brew 3044]

41 minutes ago, ADHD said:

AOC⚡DC is a quantum leap. Back to Pocahontas. And thus the rich white patriarchy is scared shitless.

Along comes Brett Kavanaugh and BUILD THE WALL LOCK HER UP WITCH HUNT is the sum total of this entire sub forum.

What I'm talking about is inarguable.

I like Beer! PAAAARTY!!! IS A SUPREME COURT JUDGE. 

bullshit on your American Dream brochures. Bull fn shit.

I don’t know one person that went to Harvard, I know several worth well into the 9 figures and all were self made. None drive fancy cars, none have big mansions, all still work, all could pack it up and leave if they wanted to, that’s one look at the American Dream. Grow some balls, find the opportunity, and see which side of “luck” you come out on.

[elfenix 34167]

binders full of self-made hundred millionaires!

[Dahobbs 17420]

5 minutes ago, Brew said:

I don’t know one person that went to Harvard, I know several worth well into the 9 figures and all were self made. None drive fancy cars, none have big mansions, all still work, all could pack it up and leave if they wanted to, that’s one look at the American Dream. Grow some balls, find the opportunity, and see which side of “luck” you come out on.

Again, that is survivorship bias. There is an xkcd for that:

 

[Brew 3044]

I can tell you about the ones that have failed also if you want to hear about them. This is a complete waste of effort, but I don’t believe I’ve typed anywhere that everyone has the same ability to move up to the same spot. I said pretty much everyone has the abilility to improve their standing (the American Dream) and that there are plenty of people out there getting to the top of the ladder with a low start not just because they went to Harvard.

[Dahobbs 17420]

8 minutes ago, Brew said:

I can tell you about the ones that have failed also if you want to hear about them. This is a complete waste of effort, but I don’t believe I’ve typed anywhere that everyone has the same ability to move up to the same spot. I said pretty much everyone has the abilility to improve their standing (the American Dream) and that there are plenty of people out there getting to the top of the ladder with a low start not just because they went to Harvard.

The point is that probability is a bitch. Two people of equal ability and opportunity, taking the same risk, can end up in completely opposite outcomes. You can't just say, "it is possible", without also recognizing the relative probability and providing some safety net for those who dont get the coin to land on heads.  

[DixonHur 11074]

1 hour ago, Smax said:

Never thought about it but something similar, I do know unlike communism and socialism, it works

Define works? 

[Brew 3044]

10 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

The point is that probability is a bitch. Two people of equal ability and opportunity, taking the same risk, can end up in completely opposite outcomes. You can't just say, "it is possible", without also recognizing the relative probability and providing some safety net for those who dont get the coin to land on heads.  

If probability and luck were the driving factors then we should just play the lottery. Bad luck is different than making a stupid investment/gamble. There are a lot that get hung by bad luck/timing. There are a lot of others that get hung just by being stupid. Probability comes in when evaluating the risk/reward factor and the decisions you make based on that.

Anyone that looks as success as only getting the lucky breaks has no clue what it takes to be successful.

[Dahobbs 17420]

1 minute ago, Brew said:

If probability and luck were the driving factors then we should just play the lottery. Bad luck is different than making a stupid investment/gamble. There are a lot that get hung by bad luck/timing. There are a lot of others that get hung just by being stupid. Probability comes in when evaluating the risk/reward factor and the decisions you make based on that.

Anyone that looks as success as only getting the lucky breaks has no clue what it takes to be successful.

What? I never said it was just luck. But everything is probability. You can do things to get the probability of success to be higher, but even at 99%, a lot of people will hit the 1%. All I am saying is that we have to think about those people and do something more for them than saying "it just takes hardwork" and "pull yourself up by your bootstraps, like me." If someone who has had success can't admit that something other than their effort contributed, then they are simply delusional. 

To be clear, I am not saying that is you. But it is an attitude I see all too often from those who have had some success. 

[Smax 3799]

15 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Define works? 

 

 

most successful, prosperous and strongest county in history. One where people from all parts of the world flock too to build a better life.

[Brew 3044]

I don’t disagree with any of that outside of where you may be going with those that failed. I will say I hear more of the statements in the middle in reference to those that have not seemed to try rather than those that have tried and failed.

[ndawg 1242]

1 minute ago, Smax said:

 

 

most successful, prosperous and strongest county in history. One where people from all parts of the world flock too to build a better life.

How do you know capitalism is the root cause of our success?

[Smax 3799]

1 hour ago, Doc Reeves said:

No one is disputing that, just pointing out it works better for some than others. Not great in a country where we are all supposed to be equal.

 

read on some are...

 

and as far as the legal system goes, you want equality,  blindfold the jury racism is just as much in play then money. With that said can people of more means hire better attorneys and field a better defense, why yes just as people with means can buy better clothes bigger houses ....

[Smax 3799]

3 minutes ago, ndawg said:

How do you know capitalism is the root cause of our success?

 

I would look at attempts of communist and socialist societies, all failures and compare them to all the prosperous societies based on the capitalist model.

What would you attribute it to?

[Brisketexan 104462]

I’ve put it this way here before, but I’ll do it again: what are we going to do about all of our morons? Half of the population is of below median intelligence. But for a few freakish exceptions, they are never going to make big bucks. And, they’re going to marry other morons (selection bias: I married a fancy college girl because I was a big time college boy, and most of you did the same).

Is every moron entitled to a G5 and a mansion? Of course not. And that’s not where the issue lies. It’s not that the morons don’t have a G5. It’s that they are in a position that if they miss a single paycheck, they get evicted. If their car needs a $1000 repair, they lose transportation and lose their job. If they get seriously ill, medical debt breaks them.

And they see the wealth accumulating at the top, where they’re lighting cigars with stacks of $100 bills now.

It is in our best interest - for ALL of us, including the wealthy, for folks who work a regular job to be able to survive a $1000 car repair, or not go broke because they got sick. They don’t need steak and caviar, but every person working a decent job should be able to breathe easy with some measure of security.

If enough of them can’t, then that’s when the pitchforks come out. History is full of that lesson. We should heed it.

[Dahobbs 17420]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I’ve put it this way here before, but I’ll do it again: what are we going to do about all of our morons? Half of the population is of below median intelligence. But for a few freakish exceptions, they are never going to make big bucks. And, they’re going to marry other morons (selection bias: I married a fancy college girl because I was a big time college boy, and most of you did the same).

Is every moron entitled to a G5 and a mansion? Of course not. And that’s not where the issue lies. It’s not that the morons don’t have a G5. It’s that they are in a position that if they miss a single paycheck, they get evicted. If their car needs a $1000 repair, they lose transportation and lose their job. If they get seriously ill, medical debt breaks them.

And they see the wealth accumulating at the top, where they’re lighting cigars with stacks of $100 bills now.

It is in our best interest - for ALL of us, including the wealthy, for folks who work a regular job to be able to survive a $1000 car repair, or not go broke because they got sick. They don’t need steak and caviar, but every person working a decent job should be able to breathe easy with some measure of security.

If enough of them can’t, then that’s when the pitchforks come out. History is full of that lesson. We should heed it.

Stop making sense. 

[Brew 3044]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I’ve put it this way here before, but I’ll do it again: what are we going to do about all of our morons? Half of the population is of below median intelligence. But for a few freakish exceptions, they are never going to make big bucks. And, they’re going to marry other morons (selection bias: I married a fancy college girl because I was a big time college boy, and most of you did the same).

Is every moron entitled to a G5 and a mansion? Of course not. And that’s not where the issue lies. It’s not that the morons don’t have a G5. It’s that they are in a position that if they miss a single paycheck, they get evicted. If their car needs a $1000 repair, they lose transportation and lose their job. If they get seriously ill, medical debt breaks them.

And they see the wealth accumulating at the top, where they’re lighting cigars with stacks of $100 bills now.

It is in our best interest - for ALL of us, including the wealthy, for folks who work a regular job to be able to survive a $1000 car repair, or not go broke because they got sick. They don’t need steak and caviar, but every person working a decent job should be able to breathe easy with some measure of security.

If enough of them can’t, then that’s when the pitchforks come out. History is full of that lesson. We should heed it.

Should every moron have a brand new $1000 iPhone, a new car, etc? They should have health care, they should have a living wage, they should have social security waiting for them when the retire, they should have job opportunities and the same rights as everyone, but their “benefits” will never be the same and there is a line somewhere out there on the list of stuff.

[DixonHur 11074]

14 minutes ago, Smax said:

 

 

most successful, prosperous and strongest county in history. One where people from all parts of the world flock too to build a better life.

First off, you're "defining" what you think the US is currently.  Secondly, all those attributes are relative and time specific.  Egypt, Greece, Ottoman Empire, Rome, etc., all held those titles once, but none were capitalist.

But if you want to talk the US, then you have to acknowledge that we have the largest amount of debt in history.  Not just National Debt, but consumer debt as well.

75% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck.  The Top 1% holds 40% of the wealth.  So, how is capitalism any better than the feudal Lordships of the past?  Aside from the fact that in the feudal system the wealthy actually fought in the wars they waged.

[ndawg 1242]

19 minutes ago, Smax said:

I would look at attempts of communist and socialist societies, all failures and compare them to all the prosperous societies based on the capitalist model.

That would be like trying to arrive at a scientific discovery by filling test tubes and beakers with household cleaning supplies.

19 minutes ago, Smax said:

What would you attribute it to?

That's a hard question to answer. Rolling up a summary of two and a half centuries of history is not an easy feat for anyone who wants their conclusions to be based on thorough analysis.

The problem I have with your assertion is that it's stuck in a particular paradigm, i.e. it artificially subdivides concepts that are not mutually exclusive. We can increase social benefits and not become "less" capitalistic. Conversely, we can remove social benefits and not become "more" capitalistic. The very idea that there's a single line where we can put "socialism" on one side and "capitalism" on the other is actually absurd, but it serves a purpose. The rich don't want to help the poor (naturally), so they convince the poor that social programs will hurt them more than they help them. None of that really has anything to do with any -isms, even though it may appear that way on the surface.

The United States of America in 1790 didn't choose between capitalism and socialism. And our understanding of economics and social dynamics has advanced bigly in the meantime. What is "capitalism" today versus when Smith wrote Wealth of Nations? If we want a better country, it's not about picking the right "-ism," it's about reaching consensus on what constitutes progress, and then doing the work. Is it "progress" if our rich get richer but our middle class dies off? Is it "progress" if people below the poverty line die of preventable diseases?

So, I'm not trying to explain our success as a country. I'm suggesting you should stop using it to erroneously lend credence to oversimplified historical narratives. Instead, let's focus on how to make our country better (and what "better" actually means).

Edited January 5, 2019 by ndawg

[Smax 3799]

1 minute ago, DixonHur said:

First off, you're "defining" what you think the US is currently.  Secondly, all those attributes are relative and time specific.  Egypt, Greece, Ottoman Empire, Rome, etc., all held those titles once, but none were capitalist.

But if you want to talk the US, then you have to acknowledge that we have the largest amount of debt in history.  Not just National Debt, but consumer debt as well.

75% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck.  The Top 1% holds 40% of the wealth.  So, how is capitalism any better than the feudal Lordships of the past?  Aside from the fact that in the feudal system the wealthy actually fought in the wars they waged.

 

Most of those americans in debt and living pay check to pay check are because they have to have 4k tvs, new iphones and multiple cars in the driveways.

Knowing what you know about history, given your current status in life which era  mentioned would you choose to live in.

 

Thats what I thought 

[Smax 3799]

2 minutes ago, ndawg said:

That would be like trying to arrive at a scientific discovery by filling test tubes and beakers with household cleaning supplies.

That's a hard question to answer. Rolling up a summary of two and a half centuries of history is not an easy feat for anyone who wants their conclusions to be based on thorough analysis.

The problem I have with your assertion is that it's stuck in a particular paradigm. It artificially subdivides concepts that are not mutually exclusive. We can increase social benefits and not become "less" capitalistic. Conversely, we can remove social benefits and not become "more" capitalistic. The very idea that there's a single line where we can put "socialism" on one side and "capitalism" on the other is actually absurd, but it serves a purpose. The rich don't want to help the poor (naturally), so they convince the poor that social programs will hurt them more than they help them. It really hasn't got anything to do with any -isms.

The United States of America in 1790 didn't choose between capitalism and socialism. And our understanding of economics and social dynamics has advanced bigly in the meantime. What is "capitalism" today versus when Smith wrote Wealth of Nations? If we want a better country, it's not about picking the right "-ism," it's about reaching consensus on what constitutes progress, and then doing the work. Is it "progress" if our rich get richer but our middle class dies off? Is it "progress" if people below the poverty line die of preventable diseases?

So, I'm not trying to explain our success as a country. I'm suggesting you should stop using it to erroneously lend credence to oversimplified historical narratives. Instead, let's focus on how to make our country better (and what "better" actually means).

 

We are going to have vastly different ideas on what "better" means

[Bozo_Casanova 26232]

As if this thread couldn’t get uglier here’s smax to talk history and economics.

[ADHD 28]

1 hour ago, Brew said:

I don’t know one person that went to Harvard, I know several worth well into the 9 figures and all were self made. None drive fancy cars, none have big mansions, all still work, all could pack it up and leave if they wanted to, that’s one look at the American Dream. Grow some balls, find the opportunity, and see which side of “luck” you come out on.

Luck isnt a part of it because luck doesn't exist as people mean it. And neither does "grow some balls and find the opportunity"

That's gonna make you homeless as much as it makes you rich.

It's all about money and it takes money to make money. And if you don't have it, or you have access to it, you will never have it (without bending rules). There are so many built in barriers it's ridiculous & they are not government barriers, they are social and ethnic and genetic etc. 

Going to church and being white and having access to good schools, nneighborhoods and support networks is definitely access untied to hard work.

How many frats and sorority girls hit it it rich. Like the majority. And they do not work hard in a laborious fashion and you know it.

[ndawg 1242]

Just now, Smax said:

We are going to have vastly different ideas on what "better" means

Of course! Building consensus is a painstaking, agonizing process. But it's what we need to do as a country to heal.

[jimmyjazz 45513]

2 hours ago, ADHD said:

Btw the keypoint re AOC you need to recognize is not her dancing. It's the fact she went to Boston U.

This is change!

Yeah, it's nuts that someone from New York went to Boston University.  It's a fucking conspiracy, man.

[Brisketexan 104462]

Should every moron have a brand new $1000 iPhone, a new car, etc? They should have health care, they should have a living wage, they should have social security waiting for them when the retire, they should have job opportunities and the same rights as everyone, but their “benefits” will never be the same and there is a line somewhere out there on the list of stuff.

Of course there is.

That said, in Texas, it’s hard as hell to live and work without a reliable car. Doesn’t have to be fancy, but it needs to run. Today, it’s effectively necessary to have a smart phone to participate in the social and commercial world. Doesn’t have to be the latest and greatest, but it needs to work.

Here’s an example of how we’ve made a wrong turn. When I was at UT 30 years ago, I had friends and classmates who came from very little. They were able to work 20 hr a week jobs, and then work full time in the summer, and pay for college. They ended up with a degree from a flagship university with no debt, or at least very little. Today, to pay for that exact same degree, you’d have to work 50-60 hrs a week (which of course, can’t really be done while you’re trying to go to school). So, you take on a huge chunk of debt.

80s kid: works 20 hours a week, UT degree with zero debt.

2018 kid: works 29 hrs a week, UT degree with $40k debt.

That puts you way the fuck down the ladder of success before you even got started, compared with just 30 yrs ago. People in that class are getting fucked.

But people at the top of the ladder? They’ve seen their wealth increase dramatically. It’s the dynamic of “I’m getting fucked while the top few percent are adding to their wealth” that ain’t healthy at all.

I’d like a kid from a poor family to be able to do what my friends did: work 20 hrs a week, and get a UT degree so they can start their life debt-free. I don’t want them to get anything special. I want them to get what we had just 30 yrs ago. I don’t think that’s wrong to expect, and I think it would make for a much healthier society.

That’s just one example. We could do a dozen more.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

33 minutes ago, ndawg said:

How do you know capitalism is the root cause of our success?

It was primarily caused by rapid population growth across the mostly blank slate that the US was.  The English were more capitalist than us, and yet they fled in droves to the US.  

[FondrenRoad 4378]

4 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

As if this thread couldn’t get uglier here’s smax to talk history and economics.

Yeah, a trust fund kid turned adult who has never worked a day in his life. He makes Trump and Johnny Sack look self made in comparison. At least they did something with their inheritances. 

[jimmyjazz 45513]

53 minutes ago, Brew said:

If probability and luck were the driving factors then we should just play the lottery.

Well, that's a really stupid perspective.  Beating the lottery is a far less likely outcome than working hard and climbing the ladder, but it doesn't mean there is no luck involved when it comes to taking your shot.  Imagine opening a homebuilding or landscaping business in early 2010.  Things are recovering, people start to get flush with excess cash, and they're willing to hire you.  Now imagine opening the same business in the summer of 2007.  You could argue that one should know when to shut it down based on the tea leaves, but the fact is that once you're in, you're in, and if you get in at the wrong part of the cycle, you're probably fucked.  You still have mouths to feed, though.  You don't have the luxury of "waiting it out" (despite what Donald would have us believe for landlords).

[jimmyjazz 45513]

14 minutes ago, Smax said:

 

Most of those americans in debt and living pay check to pay check are because they have to have 4k tvs, new iphones and multiple cars in the driveways.

Knowing what you know about history, given your current status in life which era  mentioned would you choose to live in.

 

Thats what I thought 

You haven't a fucking clue.

[ADHD 28]

5 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

It was primarily caused by rapid population growth across the mostly blank slate that the US was.  The English were more capitalist than us, and yet they fled in droves to the US.  

Capitalism and Imperialism is the root cause of American success, that and infinite resources and a country completely isolated and protected from bordering rivals.

Woodrow Wilson set up the league of nations and that (plus the Great Depression we caused) shit tore Europe to shit, while the US mainland was untouched. We became the world's only economic super power, by default. 

It was a brilliant world take over strategy. USA USA USA!

It lasted until Europe became socialist and Russia became capitalist and the United States became Christian-Armageddonist.

So we lost. Make America Great Again was an admission of this. The error of course was electing criminals like Trump and War Mongers like Cheney. So we double downed on this, and now China and Russia own us.

Our only hope is electing a Queen, to save everyone of us.

[Brisketexan 104462]

It was primarily caused by rapid population growth across the mostly blank slate that the US was.  The English were more capitalist than us, and yet they fled in droves to the US.  

It was certainly a confluence of factors. It certainly included a system of free enterprise. It also included a blank slate with incredible national resources. And our most prosperous period - 1945-1975 - was because we had the good fortune to have two oceans preventing us from having our commercial infrastructure bombed into oblivion like the rest of the developed world did. When you’re the only country with an intact manufacturing base, you’re going to rake in the dollars.

Of course, at that time, we had pretty high tax rates on the top tiers. We had strong unions. We had wages of the average worker that were 1/30th what the CEO made; now they are 1/300th (yes, that’s accurate, in round numbers). State university degrees cost next to nothing. We built massive infrastructure (highways, airports) that fueled commerce and growth. That’s a recipe for a very successful society.

Indeed, if you want to mimic our most successful era, you wouldn’t be blindly championing “capitalism” - we’d be championing a system where regular workers made a good living. Where we invested in our society via education and infrastructure.

[ADHD 28]

16 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Yeah, it's nuts that someone from New York went to Boston University.  It's a fucking conspiracy, man.

Howard Stern went to Boston U.

And he's The King of All Media. 

AOC is damn good at media, maybe she"ll become the Queen.

[ADHD 28]

Im not kidding about this.

Harvard people go into media. Yale people go into wall St. M.I.T. go into the military.

Good Will Hunting explained all of this. Made by 2 Harvard grads.

[Brew 3044]

14 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Well, that's a really stupid perspective.  Beating the lottery is a far less likely outcome than working hard and climbing the ladder, but it doesn't mean there is no luck involved when it comes to taking your shot.  Imagine opening a homebuilding or landscaping business in early 2010.  Things are recovering, people start to get flush with excess cash, and they're willing to hire you.  Now imagine opening the same business in the summer of 2007.  You could argue that one should know when to shut it down based on the tea leaves, but the fact is that once you're in, you're in, and if you get in at the wrong part of the cycle, you're probably fucked.  You still have mouths to feed, though.  You don't have the luxury of "waiting it out" (despite what Donald would have us believe for landlords).

It was a facetious take based on the luck trend from several people. Apparently that wasn’t clear in the very next f-ing sentences where I mentioned bad luck and timing in line with exactly what you typed. Of course people get hung on timing, bad luck, etc and just as many get hung making stupid bets. My point was that in my view luck isn’t the driving force with success.

[Brew 3044]

29 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Of course there is.

That said, in Texas, it’s hard as hell to live and work without a reliable car. Doesn’t have to be fancy, but it needs to run. Today, it’s effectively necessary to have a smart phone to participate in the social and commercial world. Doesn’t have to be the latest and greatest, but it needs to work.

Here’s an example of how we’ve made a wrong turn. When I was at UT 30 years ago, I had friends and classmates who came from very little. They were able to work 20 hr a week jobs, and then work full time in the summer, and pay for college. They ended up with a degree from a flagship university with no debt, or at least very little. Today, to pay for that exact same degree, you’d have to work 50-60 hrs a week (which of course, can’t really be done while you’re trying to go to school). So, you take on a huge chunk of debt.

80s kid: works 20 hours a week, UT degree with zero debt.

2018 kid: works 29 hrs a week, UT degree with $40k debt.

That puts you way the fuck down the ladder of success before you even got started, compared with just 30 yrs ago. People in that class are getting fucked.

But people at the top of the ladder? They’ve seen their wealth increase dramatically. It’s the dynamic of “I’m getting fucked while the top few percent are adding to their wealth” that ain’t healthy at all.

I’d like a kid from a poor family to be able to do what my friends did: work 20 hrs a week, and get a UT degree so they can start their life debt-free. I don’t want them to get anything special. I want them to get what we had just 30 yrs ago. I don’t think that’s wrong to expect, and I think it would make for a much healthier society.

That’s just one example. We could do a dozen more.

Education would be another right, but I don’t believe everyone has to attend UT either. I also don’t know as many kids that work in college as those that did 20 years ago. They sign on the loans and pass on the opportunity to work off part of it while they are in school. 

Community college and technical school is free for all residents in TN. It’s something that other states should follow suit with.

Edited January 6, 2019 by Brew

[Brisketexan 104462]

Education would be another right, but I don’t believe everyone has to attend UT either. I also don’t know as many kids that work in college as those that did 20 years ago. They sign on the loans and pass on the opportunity to work off part of it while they are in school. 
Community college and technical school is free for all residents in TN. It’s something that other states should follow suit with.

I am a HUGE advocate of community college.