Donald Trump and US politics

Well, if wealth is a social measure of value, then the goal of distribution of money isn't dissimilar from the goal of assigning numerical ratings for games, movies, etc: in aggregate, the most liked should get the most and the least liked should get the least. Therefore, it should be that the loved are rich and the (unanimously) hated are poor.

The problem with this, however, is that economic specialization is the motor of human civilization. As we specialize in different tasks to become better at them, individuals in the economy diverge in their values, ethics and aesthetics to better suit those tasks. Therefore, the attempt to normalize suitability by minimizing deviation in the social evaluation of a particular economic actor is counterproductive, and wild differences in evaluation should be not only tolerated but encouraged, to the extent that such differences serve each in performing their task better. Public opinion should not be a monolith.

Therefore, we should expect that the rich are loved by at least a few, but held in low regard by at least a few as well; opinion on them would naturally vary as they would be of no use to some. It is those who are unanimously unvalued, those who are deemed of no use to anyone, who should be poor, and the poor who should be unanimously unvalued. It doesn't matter whether some people hate your work or not; it matters whether some people love your work or not.

So you say Trump isn't elite. To you, perhaps not. But some people say he is. So I take back what I said about you being anti-elite. I think the real question instead is which upsets you more: when those you hate are rich, or when those you love are poor. If it's the former, or if you think these two are equivalent, then there is something off about your character.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Oct 19, 2017, 2:33:34 PM
Whenever you are ready, I will assume the position of World Leader.
"
deathflower wrote:
He should have send that Check earlier. The Negative press covfefe telling the president how to do his job, how dare they.


No disagreement there. So long as the press is honest, I have no qualms with them trying to keep our elected officials honest.
PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910
"
SuicideAll wrote:
Whenever you are ready, I will assume the position of World Leader.


First we need to establish your qualifications: Can you can transport large quantities of uranium in a single bound, tear down large walls with less than 140 characters, or locate missing socks?
PoE Origins - Piety's story http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/2081910
"
SuicideAll wrote:
Whenever you are ready, I will assume the position of World Leader.
Then bend over, spread those cheeks and get ready for national politics to impale you one nation at a time. :)
"Gratitude is wine for the soul. Go on. Get drunk." Rumi
US Mountain Time Zone
"
Xavderion wrote:
Trump loves winners and hates losers. Poor people are often losers. Sad but true.


I agree. In this country there is no excuse for being poor. It's so easy to make money and so much opportunity. Now if you were born in a slum in India with caste system or some shit I can understand.

Even if you make meager wage you can be a millionaire. - read millionaire next door - waitresses owning 50 rent houses. Janitor has a million in stock market. etc.

My grandfather came here with literally $90 from war torn Afghanistan with three bullit holes and is rich as fuck today. Meanwhile natives his age with charmed life depend on social security. Idiots.

Hoenstly wealth and privileged makes you soft. Thats why I'm softer than granddad I think. But everyone is a snowflake here thats why employers like immigrants so much!

We have like 75% immigrants working for us. I was at McDonalds this morning with my guys and whole crew was latino speaking Spanish. Cuz they'll fucking work and not whine.
Git R Dun!
Last edited by Aim_Deep on Oct 19, 2017, 11:05:32 PM
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:
Well, if wealth is a social measure of value, then the goal of distribution of money isn't dissimilar from the goal of assigning numerical ratings for games, movies, etc: in aggregate, the most liked should get the most and the least liked should get the least. Therefore, it should be that the loved are rich and the (unanimously) hated are poor.

The problem with this, however, is that economic specialization is the motor of human civilization. As we specialize in different tasks to become better at them, individuals in the economy diverge in their values, ethics and aesthetics to better suit those tasks. Therefore, the attempt to normalize suitability by minimizing deviation in the social evaluation of a particular economic actor is counterproductive, and wild differences in evaluation should be not only tolerated but encouraged, to the extent that such differences serve each in performing their task better. Public opinion should not be a monolith.

Therefore, we should expect that the rich are loved by at least a few, but held in low regard by at least a few as well; opinion on them would naturally vary as they would be of no use to some. It is those who are unanimously unvalued, those who are deemed of no use to anyone, who should be poor, and the poor who should be unanimously unvalued. It doesn't matter whether some people hate your work or not; it matters whether some people love your work or not.

So you say Trump isn't elite. To you, perhaps not. But some people say he is. So I take back what I said about you being anti-elite. I think the real question instead is which upsets you more: when those you hate are rich, or when those you love are poor. If it's the former, or if you think these two are equivalent, then there is something off about your character.


I do not revere the rich nor despise the poor. Using wealth as a primary measure of a person worth or value is rather superficial. The better question is do people have the disposition to admire, and worship, the rich and the powerful, and to despise, neglect or ignore people of poor? I am sure some do.

"
Aim_Deep wrote:


I agree. In this country there is no excuse for being poor. It's so easy to make money and so much opportunity. Now if you were born in a slum in India with caste system or some shit I can understand.

Even if you make meager wage you can be a millionaire. - read millionaire next door - waitresses owning 50 rent houses. Janitor has a million in stock market. etc.

My grandfather came here with literally $90 from war torn Afghanistan with three bullit holes and is rich as fuck today. Meanwhile natives his age with charmed life depend on social security. Idiots.

Hoenstly wealth and privileged makes you soft. Thats why I'm softer than granddad I think. But everyone is a snowflake here thats why employers like immigrants so much!

We have like 75% immigrants working for us. I was at McDonalds this morning with my guys and whole crew was latino speaking Spanish. Cuz they'll fucking work and not whine.


Since There is no excuse to be poor. Here is an idea. Ban poverty.
"
Aim_Deep wrote:

My grandfather came here with literally $90 from war torn Afghanistan with three bullit holes and is rich as fuck today. Meanwhile natives his age with charmed life depend on social security. Idiots.



I admire the US for that. In europe you can t even work full time at mcdonald serving burgers if you don t have at least a 5 years university diploma. How can poor with no education even do shit?

Poe Pvp experience
https://youtu.be/Z6eg3aB_V1g?t=302
Last edited by Head_Less on Oct 20, 2017, 4:15:01 AM
"
deathflower wrote:
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:
Well, if wealth is a social measure of value, then the goal of distribution of money isn't dissimilar from the goal of assigning numerical ratings for games, movies, etc: in aggregate, the most liked should get the most and the least liked should get the least. Therefore, it should be that the loved are rich and the (unanimously) hated are poor.

The problem with this, however, is that economic specialization is the motor of human civilization. As we specialize in different tasks to become better at them, individuals in the economy diverge in their values, ethics and aesthetics to better suit those tasks. Therefore, the attempt to normalize suitability by minimizing deviation in the social evaluation of a particular economic actor is counterproductive, and wild differences in evaluation should be not only tolerated but encouraged, to the extent that such differences serve each in performing their task better. Public opinion should not be a monolith.

Therefore, we should expect that the rich are loved by at least a few, but held in low regard by at least a few as well; opinion on them would naturally vary as they would be of no use to some. It is those who are unanimously unvalued, those who are deemed of no use to anyone, who should be poor, and the poor who should be unanimously unvalued. It doesn't matter whether some people hate your work or not; it matters whether some people love your work or not.

So you say Trump isn't elite. To you, perhaps not. But some people say he is. So I take back what I said about you being anti-elite. I think the real question instead is which upsets you more: when those you hate are rich, or when those you love are poor. If it's the former, or if you think these two are equivalent, then there is something off about your character.
I do not revere the rich nor despise the poor. Using wealth as a primary measure of a person worth or value is rather superficial. The better question is do people have the disposition to admire, and worship, the rich and the powerful, and to despise, neglect or ignore people of poor? I am sure some do.
Using wealth as a primary measure of personal worth or value may or may not be superficial, depending on how well wealth is distributed within a system. However, using wealth as a primary measure of personal worth or value should not be superficial; if wealth is well distributed, then wealth and merit are strongly correlated. So do I, in practice, automatically admire and worship the rich and powerful? No, I do not. Do I have a disposition to do so? Yes, very much. It would be nice if we could rely upon such an inclination to guide us, rather than finding cause to doubt it.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Oct 20, 2017, 6:50:16 AM
Wealth is nothing but security if you want it thats fine if you dont thats fine too. Issue for me is when ppl say life is unfair and they want to steal others hard earned wealth for security instead of earn and save for it. Taxes, fees and other redistribution. It's getting that way more and more because system perpetuates itself. Dependent Life - if you grew up in a home on the govt payroll - is all you know. Charity worked just fine first 150 years of this country - no one starved on the streets even in The Great Depression, Civil war or Dust Bowl with no rain. Meanwhile wee run deficits at like 1 trillion a year clip for govt who cant tax enough and sell out the future even - and country will break eventually like some states, counties and cities are. We've taken acting like a child nationally and to all age levels.

These disaster reliefs are perfect recent examples. Govt gimmmie and everyone acting helpless like 5 year olds. Houston was better but PR made me fear for our Marxist future. I'm sure I'll be put in gulag or some shit for what I've typed here.
Git R Dun!
Last edited by Aim_Deep on Oct 20, 2017, 1:37:40 PM

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info