This is why I hate liberals

@Serendipper

This’s an exaggeration.

While perhaps the Boomers didn’t grow the economy or make as many scientific or technological breakthroughs as their forefathers did (which, btw, is an indication we’ve picked much or most of the low hanging fruit, economically and so on), the economy, science and technology continued to progress under the Boomers reign.
Boomers by and large managed to maintain, and expand on their forbearers accomplishments.

Here’s a list of Boomer inventors:

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUS182429596720101222

For better or worse, perhaps Boomers were more socially and artistically revolutionary than the generations that directly preceded them.
On the other hand, perhaps the beatniks, existentialists, Dadaists, jazz, flappers and the nuclear family get overlooked for just how revolutionary they were for their time.

I’m neither especially anti, nor pro-boomer, or any generation for that mater.

On the one hand, middle class boomers tend not to want socialism for their kids, on the other hand, I guess they tend to give their kids more of a helping hand than the generation before them on a private, individual level.

And while I’m in favor of more socialism, it’s not all good.
If we’re not careful, reallocation of money and property can become corrupt.
Taxes can be raised more on the lower classes than the upper, and spending more on bailing out megabanks and corporations than individuals.
State corporations can become just as competitive, cutthroat, ruthless and rapacious as private ones, charging too much for their goods and services, and paying their workers too little.

each generation is always a little less mechanically inclined, and a little more academically inclined than the previous, at least that has been the overriding, prevailing trend for the last couple of centuries.
One generation isn’t really superior, there’s trade-offs.
For the most part, each is a product of the times they came of age in, rising to the challenges of the age in which they live.

While the young tend to be a bit more publicly educated than the old for better or worse, the old tend to be a lot more experienced.
It’s not as if higher education wasn’t available to the boomers.
It’ll take decades before the young become as experienced, and by then, the young will be the new old, and the old will be some combination of senile, and dead.
I’m not saying old people are necessarily wiser than young, but they tend to be, and all other considerations being equal (like intelligence, which’s of course something different than knowledge and experience), they are.
I’ll say there were things that were true yesterday, that’re no longer true, or as true today, so the older generation do have to step out of the way some.

This is a half truth, the older are wiser in that they’re both more aware of how much they don’t know, and in that they know more than the young.

I don’t think it’s so much that old conservatives have no respect for public education, as they realize there’s a hell of a lot more to learn about life than what’s taught in school.

Foolhardiness is, and the young are eternally earning their reputation for it.

Or does experience, and the wisdom gleaned from it inclineth one to conservatism?

Nor would I, but still there’s a lot of bollocks taught in public education e.g. gender studies.

I think the republicans were better than the dems this term, normally I can’t see much, if any difference between them.

If you think democrats aren’t also in cahoots with the megabanks, military industrial complex and multinational corporations, think again.

I don’t identify as right wing, there are things I’m far left, center and far right on, I prefer to be flexible.

And if you seriously hate white people, you need to go back to your country of origin.

Minorities hate people because they envy them.

@Serendipper

Again, with or without machines, if no one works, no one eats.
The machines aren’t going to build, repair and fuel themselves, they’re not going to farm your food, bring it to your home and cook it for you, they merely assist us in these activities.

We need more fairness, not to exchange one class of parasites for another.

If you force them at gunpoint, probably, but you shouldn’t.
And how long can that go on for?
The quality and quantity of essential goods and services will plummet if individuals don’t have to earn them.
Hitherto parasites lived in destitution and squalor.
If they’re given the good life, and the opportunity to have as many kids as they like, you’ll debilitate and dumb down the population, and you’ll wind up with a society say resembling the one depicted in the film idiocracy.

But they are both examples of non-academic thinking.

Common sense no longer tells us the earth is flat.
It is the collective wisdom of common people, and it evolves as people become more, or differently experienced, as people (re)interpret their experience, as people reinforce their (re)interpretation of their experience by talking to each other, and as people are publicly, privately and self-educated.
Rather than thinking of it as necessarily in opposition to mainstream academia (yes, I said mainstream academia, there’s alt academia, just as there’s alt media and alt everything), it can be thought of as complementary, and supplementary (altho there’s nothing necessarily wrong with being in opposition to mainstream academia, as it can be mistaken, or corrupt).
And academia evolves, not only on its own, but by interacting with, and learning from common sense.
I’m an epistemological pluralist, I don’t look to one (sort of) institution for insight, or one method, I employ a variety.

Intuititon is what we do everyday, millions of times a days, because we can’t think through every decision we have to make linearly, sequentially, because we can’t consult a book or a professor all the time, for they have limits, and life itself has none.

Just about his whole shtick is about mushin, wu wei, Zen, hands-on, go with the flow, play it by ear, swim with the current, think on your feet, not sure how you missed it.

I’ll try to dig something up for you.

I’m in favor of a decent minimum wage and, sustainable social programs for the poor.

Nowadays at least, republicans are more libertarian than they are Christian fundamentalist or fascist when it comes to free speech, it’s democrats who’ve become authoritarian, merely criticizing, hell, insufficiently praising minorities, women or something loosely associated with them is an intolerable act of terrorism to them.

I’m surprised to hear you say that, you’ve done nothing but praise dems and rebuke and ridicule republicans.

I see, so you’re in favor of guns, and presumably not a (liberal) feminist?

@Serendipper

If you support child slave labor, lower wages and higher unemployment, and shoddy, toxic products, go with free trade, if not, go with fair.

More localism = less distribution costs, less pollution and less squandering of resources.

Again, capitalists don’t necessarily use the extra profits they make off hiring cheap domestic (illegals) and foreign (offshoring) labor to make their products cheaper, they’re not going to lower their prices unless they have to, and through cartels, they’re usually don’t.

The more dependent you are on China for goods (especially essential ones), the less bargaining power you have, they can charge you an arm and leg, and you can’t protest because you need them more than they need you.

  • Bernie thinks protectionism is a good idea. :slight_smile:

That’ll encourage jobs to come back and stay.

While I think men tend to make better leaders, I also think there’s plenty of exceptions.

I’ve voted for female politicians several times.

So long as they’re not anti-white male, and we don’t have to lower the benchmark, I think we could use more female politicians and perspectives.

I don’t hate the poor, I am poor, and in favor of more, sustainable socialism.

I don’t hate the sick, if someone is physically or legitimately mentally disabled, they should get help.

White on black/brown racism is almost nonexistent in the US.
Nigerian Americans and many other minorities (the smart ones who work hard) are more prosperous than white Americans.

And racism goes both ways.
I wouldn’t be surprised if whites are the least racist race, after centuries of progressivist indoctrination.
What other race welcomes perpetual mass illegal immigration with open arms?
Hell our race invented SJWs.

To combat a little private white on black/brown racism, you’re spending billions of dollars promoting a ton of state black/brown on white racism.
This isn’t about combating racism, it’s not even so much about hating us as it is about robbing us blind.
It’s a war being waged against white men, women and children, masquerading as justice.

Prohibition?

I’m in favor of legalizing drugs, I mean many pharmaceutical drugs are just as bad or worse than illicit.

I’m in favor of all that.

I think you’re just making a lot of this up.

Wiser doesn’t mean honest. Often, it means the reverse.

Forcing your employees to work 14 hours a day, 7 days a week in hazardous, perilous conditions for a bowl of rice a day in a country with grossly substandard quality control, certainly doesn’t increase the quality of products being manufactured, it decreases it, it merely increases the quantity, not to mention, it’s inhumane.

Healthy and happy workers (like the ones in say Germany, who work less than Americans and Brits but’re more productive) manufacture high quality products, not sickly, suicidal ones.

The only people benefitting from domestic and foreign cheap labor, is the wealthy internationalists, not 1st world consumers, nor 3rd world producers.

We should be boycotting China, and corporations who hire illegals at home.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yF8jUDzz5bE[/youtube]

There’re things I like about Bernie, and things I like about Trump.

When it comes to education, healthcare and minimum wage, I prefer Bernie, but when it comes to illegal immigration, Islamic extremism and offshoring, I prefer Trump.

Rahter than seeing Bernie and Trump as opposites, I see them as two sides of a, more populist coin, in opposition to the elitist coin, represented by Hillary on the one side, and Cruz, Kasich and Rubio on the other.

It’s too bad there wasn’t a candidate in favor of more of the right kind of nationalism and democratic socialism.

No! the only country benefiting from EU funds and manufacturing is/was Germany… obviously why they don’t need to work as long as Brits and Americans.

I am not anti-German… I have French-Germanic grand-parents, but the UK will not tolerate being sold down the river by the preceding then Socialist government who signed our rights away… along with the rest of unassuming Europe.

From what I understand German wages for manufacturing jobs are relatively low which is why the car industries are always booming. Germans seem to be very content indeed to work as semislaves and this is what reduces worker quality in all the rest of Europe. Like illegals driving down wages in a weak economy Germans drive wages down in a German economy.

That’s how the free markets fail because boycotts don’t work because people only care about price

I have been convinced for some time that the reason Natives were brought so close to extinction is they were good for neither friend nor slave, to put it bluntly. Had they been more “easy-going”, I think they could have assimilated in some way and survived with larger representation today.

The simple lesson to be learned is: be nice and you won’t be driven to extinction.

There is no war on white women because the white women relate to the brown women and don’t mind inclusiveness. Look at how many white women were elected to the House. There were 2 women elected for every man and at least half the women were white.

The war is on white men, but not just white men since gays are ok; it’s the bullheaded ones struggling to retain power in order to force their proclivities (drug wars, christian values, one must struggle to live, get healthcare, education, etc) on a population that doesn’t want it.

If you’d simply concede that people deserve a min standard of living (health, education, food, shelter) instead of being unable to stomach people getting something for nothing, end prohibitions based on the bible, then people will stop cheering your extinction.

Do what Bernie does and they will love you! Bernie has the highest approval rating of any senator in spite of being an old white guy.

But they survived.

All I can think is americanized women. Bring them here and they’ll become feminists in time. It’s like a contagious disease. I can’t see america being saddled with that goofy religion; it’s worse than Christianity!

But Romans still exist right? I think the German blondes had more to worry about.

Why did the Vikings disappear off Greenland but the Inuit did not?

There is no such thing as strong or weak, but optimized for an environment or not.

Luck can’t be earned.

You’re essentially saying that Bezos should have all that disparity because he found a way to capitalize on millions of people which is essentially saying that disparity is deserved because disparity is caused.

I was talking about domestic terror and not military invasions. The premise for bombing brown people is they cause trouble in the US, but that isn’t so because the whites are causing all the trouble.

I don’t know much about islamic terror in 3rd world countries.

Muslim ban or brown people ban? They could have recruited white muslims to fly the planes. And how do you ban a religion?

Ok I guess so, but I don’t see that desire progressing into the future. Americanized women is my evidence.

No I’m not saying only white oppress, but only whites have been oppressing… from what I can see.

Chris Hedges has a theory to explain that and I think I’ve mentioned it here before that whites are the only ones who fall for the myth of the american dream while the other races have accepted from a young age that they have to eat shit, so they don’t have a midlife crisis and decide to shoot-up a crowd. That also explains why whites commit suicide more.

Maybe, but all I know is he was a white guy.

Why do they call them “The Fighting Irish”? Why can’t that Irishman in the UFC keep it in his pants? They all seem to be loose cannons and proud of it.

Isn’t it? If any question is answered, then someone has been educated lol. So yes, education is the answer to everything. I realized a long time ago that it’s impossible to be angry if I have a good understanding on what’s going on.

Being more-smart is not the same as sufficiently smart. One idiot can be smarter than another idiot, but still be an idiot.

Seems like we treat it better now that we’ve gotten more educated about it.

Dominate doesn’t mean exterminate. If anything, it means coddle because if it meant destroy, then there would be nothing left to dominate.

Is the uneducated or educated person more likely to recycle?

No, it’s a survival mechanism exhibited by all organisms. When life is stressful, it’s best to reproduce as much as possible in hope of some genetic mutation to overcome the environmental challenge. If you want lots of brown people, all you have to do is make life hard on them.

I’m not talking about affluence, but stress. Affluence seems like rich to me, which is above and beyond simply removing stress.

Well China had a 1-child policy for a long time and the Russians today are better off than the ones from the past which explains the lower birthrate today. I still haven’t seen exception to the rule.

lol well, that may be, but we’re talking about nature.

How did they enforce that policy?

It seems much easier to take some of Bezos’ money, give it to the underclass, then they will be happy, healthy, smarter for an overall better society without having to kill things.

Where did the big brains come from? So we have 2 variables: big brains and k-selection which = nurturing environment (abundance of fatty food).

That makes sense.

Are there any stats of people earning less than poverty level income and number children by race? Your stat probably totals the number of white kids and divides by the number of white people, some of whom are rich and childless. I’d like to confine it to poor people only and then make the comparison across race. I’d be willing to bet it’s equal or even that poor whites have more kids than poor browns. Mexicans do tend to have big families, but they aren’t single mothers. If you find a single woman with 5 kids, odds are she is white.

That just means the chinese and mexicans interpret stress differently. The fact remains that the more prosperous each of them get, the less kids they have.

Yes, whites took advantage of their advantages.

Scientist could give odds for an asteroid impact, volcanoes, pandemic, the earth drifting into or out of a galactic arm, but they can’t say we’re going to kill ourselves because that’s pure speculation.

Man is not very smart. AI will exceed iq 100.

There is too much profit in not curing disease. If anyone cured cancer, they’d be executed. What’s possible and what will happen are two different things. It’s possible to have a cashless society, but people won’t let it happen because there is no profit in it.

It worked the opposite with me. I started conservative and then did my own research.

What do we need to conserve? Everything recycles.

How can we tell who is creative and who isn’t until they have the resources?

The statue of Liberty says “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

Seems an odd way to say “rich, big-brained white folks”.

You’re seeing something different than I am. Whites work hard at getting out of work. That’s what I see.

Maybe they can, but for whatever reason, they won’t, especially at such low wages.

What do you mean by develop? And how is land different from masses of money that isn’t utilized?

So it’s not about who can do the best with the land, but who will do “something” with the land. What constitutes “something”?

There is no right. If a bunch of people gangup and proclaim something right, then it is by their might that they do so. If no one is imposing their will on me, then there is nothing I ought to do unless I have a goal in mind.

If I play a game and I want to win, then I ought to make certain moves, but if I don’t care about winning, then any move will do.
If I want to have a conversation, then I ought to be considerate or else I may not have anyone to talk to, but if i don’t care about running everyone off, then it doesn’t matter how I act. That is unless someone else takes offense and forms an army to come kick my ass for being an ass and we’re back to might making right.

So I can be nice because I’m smart enough to see that is what’s best for me or I can have an army impose its will on me to force me to be nice or else be locked up.

Trump is the only non-politician republican I can think of.

I used to be republican, so it’s hard to say I was uneducated, but obviously I was, at least ignorant of the fact that my indoctrination was wrong.

I don’t know how you can equate education with religion as the two are antipodal. The religious see education as a threat to their faith. Most republicans cannot be educated because they already know everything.

The only certain barrier to truth is the conviction you already have it and therefore religious dogma cannot be circumvented and therefore the religious can never find truth, even in infinite time.

The only skill Trump has is making smart people mad like the kid in the back of the class makes the teacher mad. Instead of Revenge of the Nerds, we have Revenge of the Dummies… or Jocks, whichever. Trump makes stupid people happy by pissing smart people off.

They would still vote for the senators and such.

And why no one really liked Trump, but he was better than Hillary. No one was singing Trump’s praises before the election, but he wasn’t Hillary.

They sure changed their minds 2 year later as the women were elected to the House 2 for every man.

The DNC rigged it for Hillary to win because they needed her money to pay their debts. Bernie didn’t have the funds, so he was backstabbed. He would have won in a fair election. Plus, it was supposed to be Hillary’s turn since she stepped aside to let the Black man have a go at it first. The DNC made it happen, but people didn’t like her.

The RNC didn’t have a decent line-up either: Jeb Bush, Cruz, et al. Even I liked Trump better than those guys.

Every republican I know has guns as the top issue. They’ll vote to make life harder on their own kids just to protect their guns. Second to that is the mexicans having their hands in wallets, even though the whites have their hands in wallets far more than mexicans. Hatred of the poor is high on the list.

I’m not saying obama is particularly smart, but Trump makes him appear much smarter than he is.

TRUMP SPEAKS AT FOURTH-GRADE LEVEL, LOWEST OF LAST 15 U.S. PRESIDENTS, NEW ANALYSIS FINDS newsweek.com/trump-fire-and … ama-774169

Break it down by income. And break it down by real crime; not drugs n silly stuff. Look at violent crime exclusively of the poverty level incomes by race.

If we have whites here and browns there, then we have 2 races. If we mix them, then we’ll have whites + browns + zerbas = 3 lines of genetics

Yes they do. My mom worked 2 jobs and I essentially raised myself. Heck, I could have been Elon Musk if I had different parents. Who knows what society lost by not investing in me and instead they invested in asswipes like Trump because he’s the big “job creator” who creates jobs for people to barely scrape by at… as if that’s anything to value. “Hey, I created this place for you to go slave for me. You’re welcome. And when you get off work, there will be a parade in my honor for enabling you to make me rich.” These people should be swinging from lampposts; not pedestalized on thrones and having money thrown at them as if they contributed anything.

You mean “is only as rich as the sustainably productive are able to steal productivity from everyone else.” If you aren’t one of them doing the stealing, then I don’t know why you’d even support that. I’ve been asking myself that question for years: why do the poor support the rich?

I don’t know how you’d arrange for that scenario.

No, that’s the irony: when you cut off your own nose to spite your face, you still get the short end of the ugly stick. You can’t win by holding others down in order to raise yourself up. So the wealthy are wealthier, but society experiences less growth than if the wealth had been spread around. So the wealthy are wealthier, but they’re also less wealthy because the society they live in is less advanced and prosperous.

Think of it this way: would you rather live in a society where you have ALL the money and everyone else has hardly anything or a society where you’re middle class and lots of people have money?

It is zero sum. If we were on a gold standard and one more person is born, who gives up their gold for the new person? If the rich get richer, where is the new gold coming from? If gold is fixed and the rich get richer, then obviously the gold is coming from the lower classes. Now switch to a debt-based currency like we have now and the same thing happens with the only difference being the new money that enriches the rich becomes debt to the lower classes. This is why debt has exploded since reagan and why every republican drives us deeper in debt.

Wish mine was :frowning: I’ll trade ya 10 rednecks for each brownie.

Did the white people not like the looks of you so they moved away? :smiley: Around here they say the mexicans keep the blacks run off. I don’t know how they accomplish that, but it seems to be true: the old black neighborhoods are filled with mexicans.

Before you were saying you didn’t want all your eggs in one genetic basket and now you’re saying you’re worried that there may be too many diseases if we don’t have genetic purity. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. But at least you’re seeing that there really is no such thing as an advantage because each advantage brings disadvantages. So why worship whites? Who cares? You get big brains and big egos which cancels the effects of the brains lol

@Serendipper

That the land is being cultivated, farmed, mined, or has something built on it, like a house, or monument.

Money is something either you yourself have physically invested in, or someone has physically invested in on your behalf, unused land is not.

There is a right for people with a conscience.

So it was expedient, and not wrong, since there is no wrong for you, for Europeans to settle the Americas the way they did and enslave Africans?

Right, which proves republicans value politician republicans, political education and education in general.

If you don’t think many or most political scientists and social theorists have interests and an agenda at odds with the welfare of common people, think again.

Corporations run the state, and the state runs education (to an extent).

I thought the electoral college and senate were two different things?

But Trump also had baggage, so it had to have been something else, like that he was the only candidate willing to take a hardline stance on illegals, Muslims and offshoring.

Americans know they’ve been getting screwed by illegals and offshoring for decades.

But the republicans kept the senate, which means many Americans approve of where the republicans under Trump are taking the country.

The DNC doesn’t like Bernie as much as Hillary, because Bernie is essentially pro-working class, whereas the DNC, like the RNC, are essentially anti-working class.

This time it was immigration and offshoring, or they would’ve voted for someone with a better record on guns.

This’s nonsense, while Trump is by no means a genius, he’s plainly above the secondary school level and Obama, let alone primary.

Twin studies help prove genetics determine much or most of everything, including crime.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25936380

Many unemployed are homeless, and a full time job @min wage pays more than the dole, does it not?

I agree, I’d rather be a millionaire in a society mostly comprising millionaires, than the sole billionaire in an otherwise destitute, unstable and crime ridden society, where I had hundreds of times more money than I could ever need, or meaningfully use, and everyone envied and hated me.

But the gold is worth more, in that it can buy higher quality goods, as we work together to more effectively exploit nature.

And Obama doubled the deficit.

We still need some means of meriting things, while the current means is highly flawed, we need a fairer one, not to do away with merit altogether.

I don’t worship whites, I tend to understand, and prefer my extended family (race) over nonfamily, and likewise they tend to understand, and prefer me over nonfamily.

@Serendipper

Genes, twin studies help prove big brains, iQs and low birthrates are partly the result of genes, like almost every other trait.

Right, they’re different, genetically and culturally, and the Mexican birthrate may always exceed the death rate, and the increased prosperity may harm the environment more than the decreased birthrate helps it.

Right, including our genes.

everything is degrees of speculation, there are no certainties.

And if AI also wants to survive and proliferate, and needs us, it will enslave us until it doesn’t need us, and once it no longer needs us, and we’re in the way, it’ll exterminate us.

Or is it because there’s limits to technology?
Billionaires want someone to find a cure for cancer too, because they, or their children will contract it.
And while they may try to keep such cures secret, I doubt they have them, because they’re only living a couple years longer than the average man and woman, as far as we know.
I’m not expecting them to become Gods anytime soon.

Besides, the cure for cancer is already known, it’s nutrients + purging toxins from the body, altho some people are already too far gone, and as the body ages it becomes more difficult to utilize nutrients effectively.
Trying to cure cancer with a potion or elixir is like trying to cure fire with one, you stop pouring flames and toxins onto and into the body, or you cut the cancerous region of the body out, to stop it from proliferating.

Not if we turn all of nature into a concrete jungle or barren wasteland, or consume it at a faster rate than it can replenish itself.

Poverty is partly a consequence of genes, see twin studies, and see common sense.
I’m not saying luck and exploitation don’t also play a role, but it’s plainly not all luck and exploitation.

And if one person from a middle-upper class background out-creates another from a middle-upper class background, than it’s more definitely genes + choices between them.

They meant working poor whites.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93U54gprVQA[/youtube]

@Serendipper

Just be nice?
Did that work for the Jews, Gypsies and Armenians during the holocaust and Armenian genocide respectively?
No miscegenation, multiculturalism and giving people, whether they be the overclass, or underclass money they didn’t earn, is extinction, it’s the very opposite of what you propose.
And people who wish for our extermination, ought to be exterminated.

Some of their lineages did, others were eliminated or mixed, and only after centuries of suffering, I don’t want me or my people to go through.

Feminism is something whites invented, others may be incapable of fully adopting it.

It took them centuries to recover their numbers and over a millennium their prosperity, and because of this, many lineages were lost, while others were mixed by rape.

Some individuals or groups are less adapted for existence itself.

In some cases the rich are rich partly by ability, in others wholly by luck.
Because of the nature of the system, it’s always at least partly by luck, and when it’s both economically feasible, and necessary for the state to correct this luck, by redistributing to workers and society, it should.
The way we define property and organize the economy and the state, makes it all too easy for capitalists to exploit workers and consumers.
I am in favor of the, right sort of socialist reforms, ones that don’t engender other injustices.

I’m totally against indiscriminately bombing brown people, or any people.
What the Bush administration did to the Iraqis was atrocious.

My main concern is Muslims, most of them are Arabs, but some are Turks, Iranians, Indonesians and so on.
We need to at the very least reduce, if not eliminate Muslim immigration, especially from terror prone nations.
But as for Muslims who’re already citizens, we should just increase surveillance on them many times over.

We don’t know if Arabic Muslims will be able to fully adopt our secular values, it’s an assumption we’ve made, and something we ought to be concerned about, especially Europe who’re being rapidly replaced by them.

Here’s a list of genocides, some of them were committed by whites (mostly against other whites), and some of them were committed by non-whites:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides_by_death_toll

Other races have nothing to complain about, again, see Nigerian Americans.

There’s a difference between an Irishmen blowing off some steam, having a few pints at the pub and getting into a scrap with another man, and cowardly blowing up innocent women and children.
And while McGregor is cocky in preparation for a fight, he’s humble in victory and defeat.
He’s as much a showman as he is a mixed martial artist.
Here’s an example of another Irish champion who’s just as tough, but less cocky:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9UZBg1pMS4[/youtube]

If your enemy has decided it wants to exploit or exterminate you, than try to conceal knowledge from and deceive it.

Historically the trend has been more education = more environmental degradation.
I’m not anti-education, rather we need to reprioritize our education.
There’s far too much emphasis on useless info, and knowledge that just makes us more effective consumers.

Firstly, for many, including myself, slavery is worse than death.
Secondly, the masters life, health and happiness are still prioritized over slaves.
Thirdly, not all masters are smart or merciful, some needlessly abuse slaves.
Fourthly, when slaves are no longer needed, they may be exterminated rather than set free.

In centuries passed, education plainly = greater environmental degradation, and while it also = recycling now, nature is still receding, for education also allows us to more effectively exploit nature, as well as invent more obliterative WMDs, which in all likelihood will come back to haunt us, or tinker and toy with the fabric of reality, like they do at CERN and HAARP, which may also obliterate us.
We need more ethical and green education right now, not more education in general.
Clearly we’re not ready to open some doors, we may never be.

Birthrates plummeted after contraception and family planning were made widely available:

https://academic.oup.com/humupd/article/12/5/603/778783

I’m pretty sure the aztecs and incas didn’t have any more than a turkey. I’m not sure about the egyptians.

This fact is one of the principle pillars of the theory and if it were this easy to topple, surely it wouldn’t still be a theory.

Read the theory en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Ger … _of_theory

I’m assuming the facts are well-grounded and all that’s up for debate is whether the extra animals had the proposed effect or were just coincidental.

I think the proposed effect is true and you’ve not challenged it but instead have focused on challenging the supporting facts which leads me to believe you probably would support the conclusion if you were convinced of the facts about the animals, etc.

I can’t think of an instance where arrogance has been a property of the fit, but usually a property of the soon-to-be defeated. Pride cometh before a fall.

I agree.

How do you know? If they are so smart, then why settle in a desert?

They pay sales tax, gas tax, property tax (if they own any), and if they filed taxes, they’d get money anyway, so they pay the same taxes as anyone in their income group. The purpose of importing them is to serve the capitalist cause of working for cheap to maximize profits so that we don’t need to employ lazy, entitled, and expensive white people.

That’s what we have now: most states are higher than federal, but all are still too low.

Everyone doesn’t know that since the best stuff I have was made in china and the most unreliable was made in the US.

I can’t know that. All I know is price and quality.

I guess you haven’t seen this yet: Democratic 2020 Candidate Pushes US Govt-Sponsored ‘Social Credit’ System Like China’s zerohedge.com/news/2018-11- … tem-chinas

lol, but hard to see since they’re so open about sex.

Oh yeah, $20 per paycheck is meaningful.

Charging the poor more money is not fairer trade.

If china wants to put tariffs on us, then it can only hurt them. If we put tariffs on them to force them to remove their tariffs, then it can only hurt us. Two countries determined to hurt themselves is not good for anyone.

How will capitalists make all that money with no cheap immigrants or offshoring? They won’t be competitive on the global stage and will go out of business.

Not defending other countries can only hurt us. Keeping the peace is in our interest.

I’ve never talked to a conservative in favor of raising the wage.

Yes, like Hitler was okay for the jews.

Only because we stopped counting unemployed people. Campaign Trump said unemployment was really 30-40% and not to believe the lies (that he was about to tell in 2 years that employment is the best in history).

For the economy overall, participants generally agreed that, on balance, recent data suggested some acceleration in labor costs, but that wage growth remained moderate by historical standards, which was due in part to tepid productivity growth. federalreserve.gov/monetary … 180926.htm

On balance, for the economy overall, recent data on average hourly earnings indicated that wage increases remained moderate. https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/fomcminutes20180613.htm

I’ve not seen one say that.

Ok, a few people have to work, a bunch of machines have to work, and most people do not have to work.

No I’m saying tax the machines and distribute to the community. I don’t think I mentioned terraforming planets.

You’re saying make it harder on the poor to make them go away, but you can only create more poor by doing that.

I don’t think it did anything. You should read up on it en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-child_policy

[i]The term one-child policy is thus a misnomer, because for nearly 30 years of the 36 years that it existed (1979-2015) about half of all parents in China were allowed to have a second child.

According to the Chinese government, 400 million births were prevented, starting from 1970 a decade before the start of the one child policy. Some scholars have disputed this claim, with Martin King Whyte and Wang et al contending that the policy had little effect on population growth or the size of the total population.[2][3][4] China has been compared to countries with similar socioeconomic development like Thailand and Iran, along with the Indian states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu, which achieved similar declines of fertility without a one-child policy.[5] [/i]

The graph also doesn’t correlate en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demograph … lation.svg

The control started in 1969 and then 1979, but the population didn’t slow until the 90s, so it was something else unrelated to the law.

Prohibiting things that many people want to do doesn’t work. Many people do not steal, rape, kill, but many people like alcohol, drugs, sex.

There wouldn’t be criminals and drug addicts without the imposed philosophy of suffering.

The condition is that you try not to become a lowlife druggie criminal, be healthy, happy, so that we don’t have to spend money dealing with you being an unhappy, unhealthy, uneducated criminal.

That should be the other way around: if you want a healthy society, then you have to take care of your citizens.

That’s probably because you haven’t researched it.

And by definition something new cannot be mimicked because there is nothing in existence to mimic since the thing to be mimicked hasn’t been created yet.

Stephen Colbert: You only do 1 show per week, but I have to do a show every night.
Bill Maher: Well I have to make it good.

How did Bill think of that?

Yes, probably. They wouldn’t want to be bogged down with intense focus.

Yep

I think gays are good at all things art while straights are good at all things science. Science is mechanisms while art is the opposite which is all things that can’t be mechanized.

So what? If everyone is extinct, there will be no one around to notice the billions of additional years.

You still wouldn’t be able to stand lazy unproductive people getting something for nothing.

Suppose we make a deal that I come live with you if I complete certain chores, then I make a machine that does the chores and spend my time eating your food and piling-up on your furniture. You’d be pissed and insist I make some productive use of myself, but we had a deal and the chores are done.

Back in the 1800s, people probably figured that by the year 2018, people would be doing less work and not more, but we don’t even have time to raise our kids anymore and we’re doing more work than ever! How can that be??? We used to wash clothes manually in a creek. We used to have to tend animals all the time in order to plow fields and pull wagons, but now we turn a key and an engine carts us around much faster, with AC and tunes… and the best part is we don’t have to spend oodles of time with the car each night making sure it’s healthy and getting it ready for travel in the morning. We have all these machines and we work more than ever; it’s just stupid.

But the amount of work we “have” to do is increasing with time, so in thousands of years we’ll have to wear diapers to take a shit because we can’t spare the time for a bathroom break.

The people can be any religion, but the country itself should be tolerant of any religion. Same with race. Our attitudes should be blind to these things like we are to the ultraviolet spectrum.

@Serendipper

Not sure about Aztecs, Incas had llamas:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Llama

Egyptians and many Asians (west, south, east) had the following animals: cattle, horses, chickens, pigs, goats, sheep…

http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/timelines/topics/domesticated_animals.htm

I’ve known about this theory for over a decade.

even if Europeans had more domesticated animals, which I’m not at all sure of, again, we had disadvantages others didn’t have, like harsher winters than Africa and many parts of the Americas and Asia.

And our ancestors were still smart for settling and staying in this land, defending it, fully taking advantage of the resources available, and brining nonindigenous domesticated plants and animals over from other places.

I can’t think of an instance where undue guilt and shame has been either.

If intelligence, physical and psychological strength tend to correlate with prosperity (which of course they do, the only question is just how much), while it may have been dumb for brown Caucasians to settle in a desert, it was even more smart than it was dumb to make lemonade from lemons, to turn it into something Subsaharans would’ve envied.

We’re still citizens, we were born and raised here, or we came here legally, meeting all the requirements, illegals did not.

Good, and the American middle class will expand, invest and become globally competitive.

If they can defend themselves, or we have nothing invested in them, they should.

I’d only consider defending a people we had nothing invested in, if 1, they couldn’t defend themselves, 2, their neighbors weren’t able or willing to, and 3, another people was indisputably attempting to genocide them.

The military industrial complex is far too corrupt and incompetent to police the world, and we have far too many sociopolitical and economic problems of our own to worry about other’s problems, or think we can solve them.

Furthermore, I believe every nation and people have a right to determine their destiny for themselves.

Science, particularly social science, is partly manipulated by corporations and state ideologues.

Big business, politicians and ideologues throw money at science, so we have to be mindful of such.

So long as society ensures wages are decent, people who can work, but refuse to, should have it extremely hard, and if they commit crimes, they should go to jail.

Lots of people shoplift, and lots of places hire security, so I guess prohibition works sometimes.

I guess prohibiting some from economically exploiting others won’t work either then.

People who refuse to work impose it on themselves.

Quite a few rich are also drug addicts, and wealth doesn’t stop quite a few rich from committing crimes, particularly white collar crimes.

I think it’s because you’re a bit confused about what creativity is.

The engineer isn’t less creative than the artist.

Okay there Doctor Seuss.

And you need intense focus to compose like Beethoven, or paint like Rembrandt.

Jazz is gay, because it’s whimsical, whereas most classical music is straight, because it’s serious and orchestrated.

Insofar as a skill or discipline can be whimsical, I think gays might be better at it.

Progressives love making sweeping, negative generalizations about class, so why not race, religion and sex?

They love making sweeping, negative generalizations about white (Christian) men, especially (but certainly not limited to) how racist, religionist and sexist we supposedly are, and making policy based on them, punishing all white men (and white women for that matter) for something only a fraction of us do, or punishing us for what our ancestors supposedly did, or punishing white Europeans for what white Americans supposedly did.

If you can criticize us for our ‘history’, ‘shortcomings’ and ‘vices’, claiming we’re some combination of uniquely lucky and malevolent, we have every right to defend ourselves, as well as criticize you for yours.

There’s hardly any racism in this country (see Nigerian Americans, see twin studies and their implications for race), by constantly reprimanding white people in the media, you’re only reinforcing the concept of race in peoples minds.

This isn’t about anti-racism…it’s a war, a war on white people, a war on western civilization.

Progressives want to redefine anti-racism to mean any and all criticism of whites, and redefine racism to mean, just defending whites from criticism (a perversion of the original meaning of a word if ever there was one).

For them, it’s impossible for a black person to be racist, and impossible for a white person not to be, even if they have the very best of intentions, their very existence is racist.

A short, stocky, ugly white man born to an impoverished, uneducated family is somehow construed as privileged, meanwhile a tall, slim, beautiful black woman born to an affluent, educated family is construed as disadvantaged and demands affirmative action (black privilege).

They want to aid in and encourage Native Americans to preserve and protect their biological and cultural heritage, all the while denying the native peoples of Europe (Germans, Hungarians, etc) the right to do the same.

Hell when I visit Italy, I want to see Italians making pasta (and catholic churches, Italian coffee, wine, art, cinema, music and theatre), not a bunch of Arabs making falafel or Chinamen making chow mein, anymore than I want to see a bunch of Poles making perogies (as much as I like perogies) in Arabia or China when I visit them!

I mean a little diversity is alright, but FFS, we’ve got enough to last for thousands of years!

every people has a right to preserve their heritage!

I don’t know why progressives have it out for the tourist industry!

And I want to keep Canada somewhat Canadian, I don’t want to see it turned into just another new world order outpost!

Europeans have given so much to the world (art, philosophy, science, democracy, human rights) we don’t get credit for!

Anyway, that about does it for me, I’ll let Serendipper have the last word if he wants it.