Come on! They are so talented at draining the collective intelligence from society! That has to count for something, right?
Good thing I didn’t use them as an example…the ones I did, however prove it does. To say nothing about the countless ahem “ladies of the internet” (thanks for giving me that examples to work with) who quite literally go from low-middle income to upper class income or wealthy in a short time (some in less than a month).
Ah, though I have heard of him, my point still stands.
That’s a bit different from what we were discussing earlier: equality of opportunity vs equality of outcomes.
There are “ladies on the street” every day, who will disagree with your claim.
This Nation and indeed, the World, does not reward actual effort over
exploitation, and the privilege of where and whom you were born to.
If Effort were the ultimate arbiter, then the workers of the Colombian emerald mines would be swimming in money.
Instead; a select few who own the mines are.
And once again you talk past me. If I said “every” you would have had a point. I said “countless.”
And if that were true 100% of the time, no one would ever rise out of their circumstances, or suffer a reversal of fortunes.
Do you own the place you work, or does your boss? Did you build the company? Can you do what is necessary, or have the required skill set to run and maintain it and manage all the employees top to bottom, not just locally, but nationally (as well as internationally if it a global business)?
And I’m not talking “I could do what the owner of the company does in my sleep” kind of trash talking, but actually do everything above, daily, until you retire, or the more likely outcome the business is on the verge of ruin and you are fired?
Even a fast food company requires more thought and input than you might think at that level.
Again; that isn’t necessarily the results of just pure effort.
Education, opportunity, and sheer lack of concern for the effect of your ambitions on others all play a factor, as well as more variables than I have named.
The World at large rewards opportunists and exploitation.
And in general, the less conscience you have, the richer you will be.
Then go back to the “single mother in poverty” example you gave above to which I responded. If that were true, the world would never have heard of oprah and others who made it out of those situations.
So, every poor person who “makes it out” has zero conscience or morals? And every poor person is a shining beacon of morality (we both know that’s not true)?
That’s a bleak outlook, to say nothing of stereotyping a lot of people…so much for inclusivity and tolerance.
There are outliers in every single aspect of life. You cannot point at one person and say that because they made a success from adversity that it is possible for everyone.
You are reaching for rationales that do not exist.
And, I am certain that there are altruists that become successful as well.
But We both know that quick and dirty generally accomplishes the job faster.
I don’t want to have this conversation with you anymore.
You are bent on justifying anything that entitled rich folks do
in the name of merit that does not exist.
Good for you.
When those same people take all that you have I hope you remember this conversation. #ignored
That’s not what was written at all. There was no blame of video games so much as noting that it’s easy to get lulled into a rut by the siren song of repetitive time wasting games like this one.
LOL bro, keep projecting. You the who isn’t liking what I said and just keep repeating accusations and insults, acting like that makes it true. Again, I’m not gonna spend more effort than you did.
I’ll say this though: the fact the mods haven’t acted on me (or a lot of other people) is not a sign that there’s bias. It’s a sign that I’m not as bad or wrong as you think, and the things I say aren’t as unacceptable or off topic as you think.
And it looks like since my last post other people have talked about politics. It’s almost like the Streissand effect here. You didn’t like me bringing up politics, but because you objected to it so much, more people are talking more about politics lol!
mods only act when three or more people flag your post.
If your post isn’t greyed out then that has not happened.
There are no real time mods here.
I would have thought all the regulars knew that.
Well, I’ve been on this forum a long time and have gotten into more than my share of back and forths on many topics. You should know that I’m not afraid to voice my opinion, even controversial ones. Surly I’ve developed a fan club out to get me if they really wanted to, and if I’m really that toxic the mods would have eventually agreed to the reports at least once.
But I’ll humble brag that I’ve never been banned or had my post deleted for what I post. The last time I remember getting dinged was just over a swear word. As long as I keep my language out of the gutter I had literally zero issues with the mods. The modern forums actually have automatic check that won’t even allow you to post if it contained certain words (yes, censorship, there’s another politically charged topic), so with that around it’s easier to avoid being modded.
I don’t think I’m alone in this. I don’t think I’m the only one (or the worst one) who has posted politically charged comments and not get actioned on.
Even if we grant that Blizzard are just slow and lazy and even incompetent, that isn’t the same as being biased, which was the accusation.
Says the person who literally says no one can make it out of a single family poverty situation, yet squirms at the numerous examples of people of color who have done so, and one even became president of the US…supposedly a racist beyond all redemption country.
Plenty, but again you would quibble over the definition of success.
Like stereotyping and generalizing an entier gruop of people, sinply because it fits a narrative, rather than doing the hard work of thinking about the real issues and what really impacts our lives.
Like the running a company bit.
Interesting how I never did that, but you just keep regurgitating talking points rather than having an actual conversation.
And you will literally ignore everyone who has achieved through hard work and sacrifice in the name of an invisible oppressive force that someone how keeps everyone poor, yet still breaks the fortunes of rich people all the time.
For those paying attention, notice how those on that side of the converation wish harm upon you for disagreeing with you? It always ends with them either wishing you bodily harm, destittuion, or some variety of it.
How surprising. Because when facts confront narrative, covering one’s ears and retreat is the only option. Supposedly, only the dreaded “right wing” boogeyman were so intolerant.
“NO U” intensifies.
“Everyone else is doing it!” is not a valid defense either. Nor does it change that you needlessly politicized a conversation that had nothing to do with politics.
Well said, First. The man is a balloon of hot air who wants people to believe that a bimbo from Beaumont can be a Kardashian if she just works hard enough.
Heck. In 1954 that wasn’t true, and it definitely isn’t now.
When you admit you aren’t even trying to have an actual discussion AND try to project your poor effort at discourse onto someone else, that’s a new low.
Your argument(s), for starters. But I accept your concession.
Let’s take things not said for $5000, Alex. But I can see you like spewing propaganda rather than actually engaging a topic meaningfully.
Marilyn Monroe would like a word with you. Someone who came out of the foster care system to become one of the highest paid actors by 1953, a full year before your “wasn’t true then.” Plenty of other examples of people who came from nothing and achieved success.
For most leftists, what they think they know about socioeconomic class is wrong, because they don’t understand that people move through income categories. People tend to have no income as teenagers, low income in their twenties, then gradually increasing income until age 60 or so, at which point many of them drop suddenly down to near zero again (retirement, where typically all income is interest income). The typical person therefore changes income categories multiple times in their lifetime, contrary to the pop-left illusion that income categories are fixed at birth. If there are more people in their 20s and 30s than people in their 40s and 50s, yes, the middle class is going to shrink, because middle classness is unabashedly ageist and doesn’t give a freak what you think.
In order for Mallenroh to have his economic utopia of 1950s America back, all we’d have to do is have millions of military-age Americans killed (preferably via militant antifascism). Can’t be poor if you’re dead.
Cue the: “I cherry picked one person who got rich (and died from drugs or foul play, who knows?) while thousands of others starved to death.”
Which theme is that?
We would need to raise the top tax rate back to 70%.
As well as close the carried interest loophole, institute a windfall tax, and make Our corporate tax rate match the rest of the Industrial World.
That’s just for starters. Don’t get me going on bringing back Glass/Steagall 2022 version, Usury Laws and anti monopoly Laws, Ethics Laws, and Term limits for all politicians as well as Justices.
Corporations, as well as the highest value people, aren’t stuck where they are now. Unless you go full Soviet with the walls to keep people in, a corporation can always tell one country to piss off and take their game elsewhere. So in order to effectively raise the corporate tax rate without losing the corporations, some kind of value would need to be offered in exchange. If you live in an apartment, you probably don’t live in the lowest rent apartment you could find — there was probably something worth spending a little more. Well, if you’re going to increase the rent, you better have that somethin-somethin, or you’re not going to have tenants.
And you can’t tax corporations that don’t exist, or who don’t exist within your borders. And you can’t tax income they’re unable to make.