PDA

View Full Version : The inherent inequality of our capitalist system.



papabull
03-07-2010, 09:03 PM
Capitalism does not allow all people to thrive and succeed. It's a system that creates haves and have nots. And there are people who will never be able to get ahead. In fact, just two things will keep people from ever being anything but bums. Those two things are laziness and stupidity.

Either one, by itself, isn't necessarily a bar to success, although either one will certainly make life difficult here in the US for those that desire a high standard of living. Those who happen to be blessed with plentiful amounts of laziness and stupidity, however, are doomed to the most meager existence. And the biggest problem in this country is that somehow we've come to believe there's something wrong with that.

If people want to cling to their laziness and stupidity, they know what they'll get and they should accept that. If they want more, then they're going to have to work on those things a bit or better yet, lose the stupid and lazy altogether. In doing so, they'll lose the bitching about "the man keeping them down", too.

Rockntractor
03-07-2010, 09:05 PM
Kay.

patriot45
03-07-2010, 09:11 PM
Kay.

New influx! Its about time.

NJCardFan
03-08-2010, 02:15 AM
Capitalism does not allow all people to thrive and succeed. It's a system that creates haves and have nots. And there are people who will never be able to get ahead. In fact, just two things will keep people from ever being anything but bums. Those two things are laziness and stupidity.

Either one, by itself, isn't necessarily a bar to success, although either one will certainly make life difficult here in the US for those that desire a high standard of living. Those who happen to be blessed with plentiful amounts of laziness and stupidity, however, are doomed to the most meager existence. And the biggest problem in this country is that somehow we've come to believe there's something wrong with that.

If people want to cling to their laziness and stupidity, they know what they'll get and they should accept that. If they want more, then they're going to have to work on those things a bit or better yet, lose the stupid and lazy altogether. In doing so, they'll lose the bitching about "the man keeping them down", too.
Well, you got the stupidity part down pat.

Constitutionally Speaking
03-08-2010, 05:22 AM
Some people never figure it out. Capitalism is works best for everyone - as long as they are not lazy or stupid.


That is something the DUmmies and Dems never quite figure out.

papabull
03-08-2010, 07:13 AM
Some people never figure it out. Capitalism is works best for everyone - as long as they are not lazy or stupid.


That is something the DUmmies and Dems never quite figure out.

That's a fact. Show me someone who's crying that they can't get ahead; all awash in PMS (poor me syndrome) and I'll show you someone who will not take any advice that involves getting off his ass and fixing his own problems and making his own way.

Show them a route of egress and the first thing they do is start erecting barriers along it.

Advise them to get more education and you hear that they can't afford it. Tell them there are grants and loans for eductation and then they'll explain that they don't have time. Ask them how they can be home sucking down beer every night and not have time for school and they'll tell you to go get fucked.

Tell them to invest their money and they'll tell you they never have any. But they smoke dope, drink beer and watch their sports on a big screen TV.

Tell them to get a second job and then duck, because they'll probably take a swing at you for that.

Get some books and learn a new skill or trade? Fuggetabout it.

Take up a craft that they could eventually turn into a business? Are you kidding me? Too much like work.

Gingersnap
03-08-2010, 12:01 PM
There are inequities in every human system. Most people aren't particularly bright or ambitious although they are able to get through the work day more or less.

The inequities in our system have less to do with ability and drive and a lot more to do with envy.

papabull
03-08-2010, 12:05 PM
There are inequities in every human system. Most people aren't particularly bright or ambitious although they are able to get through the work day more or less.

The inequities in our system have less to do with ability and drive and a lot more to do with envy.

True. The poor people in our country have older cell phones, used cars and maybe only a couple pair of $100.00 plus sneakers. And they have to drink the cheap beer and borrow X-box games from their buddies.

BadCat
03-08-2010, 12:20 PM
There are inequities in every human system. Most people aren't particularly bright or ambitious although they are able to get through the work day more or less.

The inequities in our system have less to do with ability and drive and a lot more to do with envy.

You know, I have NEVER had a job in my profession where I did not rise to the top positions in the company.

I often wonder about the guy who has been a "Senior Software Engineer" for 25 years. And there are lots of them.

Gingersnap
03-08-2010, 12:25 PM
You know, I have NEVER had a job in my profession where I did not rise to the top positions in the company.

I often wonder about the guy who has been a "Senior Software Engineer" for 25 years. And there are lots of them.

Not everyone is ambitious. Most people are content to peg along once they get to a certain point. There's nothing wrong with that but expecting maximum reward for minimum effort is wrong.

papabull
03-08-2010, 12:48 PM
Not everyone is ambitious. Most people are content to peg along once they get to a certain point. There's nothing wrong with that but expecting maximum reward for minimum effort is wrong.

EXACTLY! One of the most fantastic things about our system is that you can decide for yourself how much, how hard or how little you want to work. If you value your time more than money, don't work any more than you have to to pay meet your financial obligations. Trim them down as much as possible so you can have plentiful free time. If you want more money, property or possessions, you can work as many hours and as hard as your health and body will allow, utilizing every possible free moment in pursuit of more money. And you can be anywhere in between with the tradeoff of work/time/money. You make the decision and YOU reap the rewards of your decision. If you made good decisions, you'll be happy with the result, whatever you wanted it to be. If you made STUPID decisions, then maybe you won't be so happy. It's all on YOU. And that's a good thing. People come from all over the world to enjoy that kind of freedom.

wilbur
03-08-2010, 01:10 PM
EXACTLY! One of the most fantastic things about our system is that you can decide for yourself how much, how hard or how little you want to work. If you value your time more than money, don't work any more than you have to to pay meet your financial obligations. Trim them down as much as possible so you can have plentiful free time. If you want more money, property or possessions, you can work as many hours and as hard as your health and body will allow, utilizing every possible free moment in pursuit of more money. And you can be anywhere in between with the tradeoff of work/time/money. You make the decision and YOU reap the rewards of your decision. If you made good decisions, you'll be happy with the result, whatever you wanted it to be. If you made STUPID decisions, then maybe you won't be so happy. It's all on YOU. And that's a good thing. People come from all over the world to enjoy that kind of freedom.

There is some research out there that challenges this assertion. I don't have the link handy, but from what I remember, it has been discovered that poverty actually has physiological effects - it alters the brain on a physical level, can inhibit learning capabilities and reasoning skills etc... so for those born in poverty, it really might not be a matter of choice; for those severely affected by it, escape might be impossible due to the physical effects of poverty alone. Poverty can almost be thought of as a literal physiological disease, if this research holds true.

It will be interesting to see how this type of research shapes our future attitudes and policies towards poverty.

papabull
03-08-2010, 01:14 PM
There is some research out there that challenges this assertion. I don't have the link handy, but from what I remember, it has been discovered that poverty actually has physiological effects - it alters the brain on a physical level, can inhibit learning capabilities and reasoning skills etc... so for those born in poverty, it really might not be a matter of choice; for those severely affected by it, escape might be impossible due to the physical effects of poverty alone. Poverty can almost be thought of as a literal physiological disease, if this research holds true.

It will be interesting to see how this type of research shapes our future attitudes and policies towards poverty.

I wonder if those studies were done by the good scientists at the University of East Anglia?

Gingersnap
03-08-2010, 01:36 PM
There is some research out there that challenges this assertion. I don't have the link handy, but from what I remember, it has been discovered that poverty actually has physiological effects - it alters the brain on a physical level, can inhibit learning capabilities and reasoning skills etc... so for those born in poverty, it really might not be a matter of choice; for those severely affected by it, escape might be impossible due to the physical effects of poverty alone. Poverty can almost be thought of as a literal physiological disease, if this research holds true.

It will be interesting to see how this type of research shapes our future attitudes and policies towards poverty.

Everything alters the brain. This isn't simply a matter of I.Q. Every task you perform changes your brain map. Brains are plastic - not hardwired. When we "go through the motions" of acting happy or industrious or courageous we actually begin to remap our brains in such a way as to make those behaviors easier and more rewarding.

Social science is still kind of stuck in the 80s on these issues but neuroscience has made a huge amount of progress on understanding plasticity thanks to the breakthroughs in imaging we now have. We no longer have to perform brain surgery on animals and extrapolate to people. We can see what's happening in a human brain and we can ask the subject questions.

Hardwiring as a theory to explain social issues is falling out of favor.

Rockntractor
03-08-2010, 01:41 PM
Everything alters the brain. This isn't simply a matter of I.Q. Every task you perform changes your brain map. Brains are plastic - not hardwired. When we "go through the motions" of acting happy or industrious or courageous we actually begin to remap our brains in such a way as to make those behaviors easier and more rewarding.

Social science is still kind of stuck in the 80s on these issues but neuroscience has made a huge amount of progress on understanding plasticity thanks to the breakthroughs in imaging we now have. We no longer have to perform brain surgery on animals and extrapolate to people. We can see what's happening in a human brain and we can ask the subject questions.

Hardwiring as a theory to explain social issues is falling out of favor.

I don't think you could photograph Wilbur's brain activity. You would get an under exposer.

wilbur
03-08-2010, 01:49 PM
I wonder if those studies were done by the good scientists at the University of East Anglia?

<sigh>... is this to be the defacto response to any scientific claim that might challenge one's belief from now on? Don't like what it says, so the scientist must be corrupt? Absolutely idiotic.

Scientific research is a big space... and no, as a matter of fact, this research wasn't done by the good scientists at CRU (and good here, is meant seriously, not sarcastically, and I will stick with that description till somebody actually demonstrates some conclusive or even mildly suggestive evidence of fraudulent data manipulation on the part of said scientists). It appears it was done by a medical researcher at Harvard:

http://neuroanthropology.net/2008/02/18/poverty-poisons-the-brain/

wilbur
03-08-2010, 01:51 PM
Everything alters the brain. This isn't simply a matter of I.Q. Every task you perform changes your brain map. Brains are plastic - not hardwired. When we "go through the motions" of acting happy or industrious or courageous we actually begin to remap our brains in such a way as to make those behaviors easier and more rewarding.

Social science is still kind of stuck in the 80s on these issues but neuroscience has made a huge amount of progress on understanding plasticity thanks to the breakthroughs in imaging we now have. We no longer have to perform brain surgery on animals and extrapolate to people. We can see what's happening in a human brain and we can ask the subject questions.

Hardwiring as a theory to explain social issues is falling out of favor.

Well, there's a difference between routine brain changes, and brain damage - or brain damage caused by disease. It all depends on the nature of the change. We can't just sit here and say, "Well the brain changes all the time, therefore any change is just normal".

This research wasnt done by social scientists, btw.

papabull
03-08-2010, 02:30 PM
<sigh>... is this to be the defacto response to any scientific claim that might challenge one's belief from now on? Don't like what it says, so the scientist must be corrupt? Absolutely idiotic.

Scientific research is a big space... and no, as a matter of fact, this research wasn't done by the good scientists at CRU (and good here, is meant seriously, not sarcastically, and I will stick with that description till somebody actually demonstrates some conclusive or even mildly suggestive evidence of fraudulent data manipulation on the part of said scientists). It appears it was done by a medical researcher at Harvard:

http://neuroanthropology.net/2008/02/18/poverty-poisons-the-brain/

Every idiotic theory you can imagine has someone with a "scientific study" promoting it. Until a study like this has been put through rigours testing and challenge and has been accepted as fact by consensus, it's completely useless as a premise for an argument.

<sigh> when will people with pet theories come to understand that?

Gingersnap
03-08-2010, 02:33 PM
Well, there's a difference between routine brain changes, and brain damage - or brain damage caused by disease. It all depends on the nature of the change. We can't just sit here and say, "Well the brain changes all the time, therefore any change is just normal".

This research wasnt done by social scientists, btw.

We're having to redefine what damage is and what it looks like and how it's treated. I don't think you understand the significance of the work that's been done over the past 7 years. It's revolutionary. Virtually everything we know about localism is being challenged and dumped.

However, all this (fascinating as it is) is far afield from the original topic.

wilbur
03-08-2010, 02:42 PM
Every idiotic theory you can imagine has someone with a "scientific study" promoting it. Until a study like this has been put through rigours testing and challenge and has been accepted as fact by consensus, it's completely useless as a premise for an argument.

<sigh> when will people with pet theories come to understand that?

I completely qualified all my initial statements about the research in question with appropriate tentativeness. I didn't even make an argument per se, I just threw out the information for food for thought.

But even so, conclusions derived from said research would not be useless as premises in an arguments at all...they would at least have some empirical support - maybe not enough for us to totally rely upon, but still far better than premises which are bald assertions made of little more than prevailing preconceptions among non-experts... most of which seem ideologically driven by "pet beliefs" about personal responsibility.

papabull
03-08-2010, 03:18 PM
I completely qualified all my initial statements about the research in question with appropriate tentativeness. I didn't even make an argument per se, I just threw out the information for food for thought.

But even so, conclusions derived from said research would not be useless as premises in an arguments at all...they would at least have some empirical support - maybe not enough for us to totally rely upon, but still far better than premises which are bald assertions made of little more than prevailing preconceptions among non-experts... most of which seem ideologically driven by "pet beliefs" about personal responsibility.

Oh, that was good! The resourcefulness that people demonstrate when arriving at rationalizations for personal irresponsibility and pity-seeking because of the onerous nature of a capitalist system that requires people to pull their own weight is truly inspirational. If they would just be so resourceful when it came to bettering themselves instead of creating excuses, we'd have a near-perfect world.

The irony, of course, is thick as mud when it becomes evident that the very same people that had tingles running up their leg at the sound of a voice boldly saying "YES, WE CAN", are the very same people who, when it comes to responsibility for their own lives, shriek at the top of their lungs "NO, WE CAN'T".

noonwitch
03-08-2010, 03:31 PM
There is no economic system that is fair to everyone all the time.


Socialism appears to be fair to all in theory, but in practice, it just creates a privileged class like any other system. It forces the privileged to be dishonest about their gains, so that they can still claim to be proletariats and win the support of the actual workers.

Capitalism provides high rewards for many who participate and during good times, it creates a large middle class with spending and voting power. It leaves out groups of people, and it leaves others behind (Detroit, for example) as the production process changes over time.

One of those things that has changed is the need for skilled labor, and the diminishing jobs for unskilled labor. There are a lot of people in this country that for whatever reason, are not at the top of the Weschler chart and are limited in what jobs they can perform. They used to make decent money working in factories. Now those jobs are gone, and they can't even get jobs at McDonalds.

wilbur
03-08-2010, 05:26 PM
Oh, that was good! The resourcefulness that people demonstrate when arriving at rationalizations for personal irresponsibility and pity-seeking because of the onerous nature of a capitalist system that requires people to pull their own weight is truly inspirational. If they would just be so resourceful when it came to bettering themselves instead of creating excuses, we'd have a near-perfect world.

The irony, of course, is thick as mud when it becomes evident that the very same people that had tingles running up their leg at the sound of a voice boldly saying "YES, WE CAN", are the very same people who, when it comes to responsibility for their own lives, shriek at the top of their lungs "NO, WE CAN'T".

Someones lost a few of their marbles, I think.

Defiant1
03-08-2010, 05:58 PM
Well, there's a difference between routine brain changes, and brain damage - or brain damage caused by disease. It all depends on the nature of the change. We can't just sit here and say, "Well the brain changes all the time, therefore any change is just normal".

This research wasnt done by social scientists, btw.

Guilt and self-loathing can do strange things to one's mind.

papabull
03-08-2010, 06:27 PM
Guilt and self-loathing can do strange things to one's mind.

You're right. But in defense of liberals, you can't blame them for loathing themselves.

Constitutionally Speaking
03-08-2010, 07:10 PM
There is some research out there that challenges this assertion. I don't have the link handy, but from what I remember, it has been discovered that poverty actually has physiological effects - it alters the brain on a physical level, can inhibit learning capabilities and reasoning skills etc... so for those born in poverty, it really might not be a matter of choice; for those severely affected by it, escape might be impossible due to the physical effects of poverty alone. Poverty can almost be thought of as a literal physiological disease, if this research holds true.

It will be interesting to see how this type of research shapes our future attitudes and policies towards poverty.


You are speaking of welfare. Not poverty.

Speedy
03-08-2010, 07:15 PM
I have two friends Gene and Jerry that I grew up with. Both guys got really fat as kids and are still that way. But Gene never really let the fact that he was obese get in the way of anything. He tried out for football and was a hell of an offenseive lineman. Two of our running backs got scholarships because of the very fact that they could run behind his fat ass. Gene for a big guy was also amazingly nimble and agile.

Jerry considered himself just too damned fat to do anything so he huffed and wheezed his way through PE.

Gene also never let his Kool Aid man physique interfere with chasing after women. He actually got laid more than most guys have a right to. He just went after women and if he could get past hello, he was really quite charming, funny and likeable.

Jerry married the first girl he ever dated.

It may not seem fair, two guys equally obese their whole lives one guy has things go right for him and the other seems cursed. Well, one guy was stupid and lazy and waited on life, the other attacked life like a lion on a slow gazelle. You deserve what you get in relation to your efforts. There is a great line in the Chronicles of Riddick. "You keep what you kill."

Rockntractor
03-08-2010, 07:20 PM
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/23530-bigthumbnail.jpg?t=1268093987