>> ^Sagemind:

I understand what he is saying, and aside from all the course language, he has a point.
(because youth today is far too "entitled" and he's right as to how they got that way.)
BUT
His argument falls apart because the economy has changed. If the economy was the same as it was even 20 years ago (never-mind 35-40 years ago in the 70s) and this attitude of youth existed, then I'd completely agree - but it isn't. Today's economy says I can't feed my family and own my own house, even with two full-time incomes in the household. I work damn hard, I'm not a slacker.
I may not run my own company but, my job, as it is today, and would have been 20 years ago, would have paid the bills and allowed some extra cash to take my family on a holiday once a year. My wife would have been able to stay home with the kids, at least part-time.
I bought a house. It cost me $400,000. Ten years ago, the same house was valued at $140,000-170,000.
Twenty-one years ago, when my house was built, it cost $100,000 brand new. Wages, on the other hand, haven't changed all that much. As I left high school, people with good jobs were making $19-25 an hour working at the mill. Today, the wages are much the same. No one is making 300% more for the same job they were doing 20 years ago. So why has housing gone up, why has everything gone up(fuel, food etc.)? The truth is I can't afford a $400,000 house, no regular person can, but what choice do I have, the cheapest rental I could find was $200 more than what my mortgage payment is.
It's the economy, it's the banks, It's globalization, It's International Trade, It's Corporations buying up all the little guys and then jacking up the prices, paying employees less and paying all the politicians to stay out of their way.
His analogy about seeing Mr. Rich and respecting him in the old days and slamming him today also doesn't stand. Today, very few people own their own business and are successfully wealthy. Most small businesses are barley hanging on, operating in the shadows of the companies like Wal-Mart. Most small businesses need to barrow money to set up shop. These businesses pay more tax and interest than they ever did.
In the sixty's to late eighties, both of my uncles owned their own businesses. They were very successful and made a decent living and had many employees. Life was good. That bubble popped in the late eighties to nineties not because business was decreasing but because new governments raised business and property taxes to the point that, they both had to close up their shops. Taxes more than doubled over night and the interest on banking skyrocketed.
So Adam's rant is fun. It makes a good point about entitlement and winy brats wanting reward without working for it but that's it. It doesn't explain Occupy of the financial state every one is in now.
Period.


we should be happy that all the increases in wage/salary/benefit that we should have been getting over the last 30yrs have been going to a small group of individuals

we should be happy that money is allowing for the degradation of rights and civil liberties

we should be happy that every noble endeavor should be stifled and made irrelevant for the sole reason of monetary gain

we should be happy that our elected officials blatantly lie to our faces, and serve only their greed, and thus the whims of those with money... and not so much individuals as much as corporate interests... corporations who while now given the same "rights" as humans, bear none of the responsibility... either to their local communities or to the nation they are now a "citizen" of

we should be happy that education is becoming something you pay off over your life as opposed to something nutured and pushed by your nation, because it's how we seize the future and progress as a society... better we become ignorant and uneducated so that we are easier to control and are reduced to grunt manual servitude to our feudal lords

we should be happy the rich get bailed out; are allowed to gamble with our money consequence free... then because of it, we lose our home and our children lose their future

better we lose our right to privacy than be subjected to invisible boogeymen
better we lose our freedom of speech than be allowed to exercise it

i honestly hope not... but I can't help feeling the road back to sanity starts with the rolling heads of politicians and bankers... and I don't mean that metaphorically

i honestly hope they have the humanity to overcome their greed... because no amount of money will overcome the fury of the masses... right now the bear is waking up... best not poke it with a stick

Heh, it's a gamble!

In reply to this comment by Shakesify:
Thanks, I do alright. I think I need to sacrifice it if I ever plan on getting to bronze though.

Although an average of 67 votes per video is pretty sweet.

In reply to this comment by hpqp:
Wow, check out that average vote per video ratio!

Hi. I've worked for the BCLC.

The company, and all other gambling entities, pay nearly 50% of their revenues to the province. These funds go to schools, sports programs, hospitals etc and have for a very long time in BC. The BCLC heavily markets this information throughout the BC, and it is a major positive for them and BC.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

I have a feeling that by the very act of asking these questions and giving these kids the opportunity to think critically makes them less likely to bully others in the future. Very inspiring.


Plus they just saw a bully getting FUCKED UP!

Some of those kids are pretty awesome though and a lot more aware than I was at similar ages (a legacy of our modern information society I imagine).

ps. I still entirely support that kid cleaning that other little bastard's clock. You pick on someone, you gamble, and he lost big time. The school should have given the bigger lad a fucking medal and made the other asswipe clean toilets for 21 days rather than sending him on a vacation.

TYT isn't asking the right questions.

Why isn't there a financial blockade on New York Times, Guardian, and Der Spiegel?

Who are wikileaks' funders, past and present?

How much does it cost to run a website that stopped accepting submissions years ago, and only hosts text and a few video files that are actually published by surrogates?

Why not use other funding methods? There's plenty of other payment processors and p2p solutions. Funny there's been a financial blockade in the US on online gambling for 5+ years, but you can find a way to send and receive funds if you really want to.

Because Pandas are pandas, not some fantasy creature. It was all well and good when it was just a little off-shoot in Warcraft 3, and hell, they could even have an homage in WoW, whatever, it's all good. But to put it so front and center, makes the whole thing silly to me. At least Draenei were something entirely different.

I seem to be having the complete opposite reaction than you - I can't understand how people can take it seriously.

I will give the expansion this, though, mechanics-wise it looks to be a big improvement.
>> ^Sarzy:

In what way is this sillier, or more out of character for WoW, than space goats?
>> ^gwiz665:
I like wow in general. I played the damn thi, ng for 2500+ hours, but while they have had many silly elements mixed in with their more "high fantasy", this puts the silly front and c, enter.
I think this is way sillier than anything they've done before, partly because it's so "centered" in view. Have small references and general sillyness in the outskirts of the game is just fine, but dammit, wow was a perfectly good game, but now it's gone silly!
<div id="widget_1015666074"><div id="widget_738281297">

In what way is this sillier, or more out of character for WoW, than space goats?
>> ^gwiz665:

I like wow in general. I played the damn thi, ng for 2500+ hours, but while they have had many silly elements mixed in with their more "high fantasy", this puts the silly front and c, enter.
I think this is way sillier than anything they've done before, partly because it's so "centered" in view. Have small references and general sillyness in the outskirts of the game is just fine, but dammit, wow was a perfectly good game, but now it's gone silly!
<div id="widget_1015666074">

I like wow in general. I played the damn thing for 2500+ hours, but while they have had many silly elements mixed in with their more "high fantasy", this puts the silly front and center.

I think this is way sillier than anything they've done before, partly because it's so "centered" in view. Have small references and general sillyness in the outskirts of the game is just fine, but dammit, wow was a perfectly good game, but now it's gone silly!

>> ^xxovercastxx:

>> ^Sarzy:
You people are all nuts. Maybe it's my general interest in Asian culture speaking, but this looks pretty awesome to me. I honestly do not get why everyone is reacting like this is the worst thing since Jar Jar Binks. Someone seriously needs to explain that to me. What looks so bad about this?

Since you asked...
Since launch, WoW has been a remarkably shallow game. It's success is attributable to oooh, shiny!, furry culture and, most importantly, people's tendencies to gambling addiction. The WoW team is kinda infamous for not coming up with any new or interesting ideas.
So when they suddenly whip out a new expansion that's based on an April fools prank by one of their artists from 6 or so years ago, yeah, it seems especially cheap. No matter... the furries will gobble this up and the money will continue to roll in.


Well sure, I mean, I can understand why some people dislike WoW in general. And of course those people aren't going to like this, because ultimately it's more of the same.

What I'm asking is why people who are actually fans of WoW are reacting so vehemently to this.

>> ^Sarzy:

You people are all nuts. Maybe it's my general interest in Asian culture speaking, but this looks pretty awesome to me. I honestly do not get why everyone is reacting like this is the worst thing since Jar Jar Binks. Someone seriously needs to explain that to me. What looks so bad about this?


Since you asked...

Since launch, WoW has been a remarkably shallow game. It's success is attributable to oooh, shiny!, furry culture and, most importantly, people's tendencies to gambling addiction. The WoW team is kinda infamous for not coming up with any new or interesting ideas.

So when they suddenly whip out a new expansion that's based on an April fools prank by one of their artists from 6 or so years ago, yeah, it seems especially cheap. No matter... the furries will gobble this up and the money will continue to roll in.

I'm going to wait till they implement this plan, lose share value, and then I will buy a 100 block of their devalued stock on a serious gamble.... It worked out for me with BP.

The thing about death is that there aren't any second chances, and the thing about life is that there aren't any guarantees. Once it's over, it's over, and it could be over at any time. This could be your last day on Earth. Every day is a gift, and yes it is yours to waste if you wish, and also yours to regret.

People make bargins because God has set eternity in every mans heart. In the end, when you are facing the cliff edge, you realize what is at stake. It's easy to distract yourself with things, but all of these things are transient. You are born with nothing and people seek to leave the Earth the same way, but there is something more after this. This is the proving ground for eternity, and God has a free ticket with your name on it. My will, my way doesn't get you there. Bargins don't either. You can't earn something that is given as a gift; it is something you have to receive. You can't be good enough, because we all fall short of the Gods standard, which is perfection. There is someone who did live up to His standard though, and His name is Jesus Christ, the Son of God. He already paid the price of admission for you; for this He gave His very life. He substitued His perfection for our imperfection, and tasted death for everyone. This requires faith. If you don't believe that, how will you receive the gift He has for you? That's why He said:

Hebrews 11:6

And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

You can't be rewarded by someone you don't believe exists. But this isn't blind faith. That's why He said to seek Him out. Finding Him is very easy; you can do it by sending Him an invitation. If you can pray this sincerely, "Jesus, if you're real, I want to know about it. If you want to give me eternal life, let me know, and I will turn from my ways and give my life to you. If it's true, come into my life and change me.", if you can open your heart and mind enough to say those words and mean them, He will answer you.

Death is a veil, and that veil was rent when Jesus rose from the dead. It is a power that has been broken, and a mystery revealed. It is a problem that has been solved, once for all time, and that time is always now. Don't gamble that you'll have the oppotunity later, because death comes without warning. Seek out the living God, Jesus Christ, who defeated death and is the only way to eternal life.

Those who are abused by the system tend to protect it the most.

>> ^Peroxide:

A lot of the (lower to middle class) right wing supporters that I meet, who endorse all sorts of values like, "don't tax the rich" and "don't help the poor," a lot of these folks seem to buy into the dream that someday they will be pulling in a million dollar salary, they will be rich. Or even that they could already be rich without taxes.
It's scary how the American dream makes slaves of the poor in much the same way that casino psychology works. "Just keep working the slots, someday I'll strike it rich, someday I'll achieve the dream." Just keep working at that job you hate,
someday...someday...someday...
Then one day, you wake up and you're life is over and you struggled the whole time, "pulling the slot machine handle," competing against everyone else instead of cooperating within communities for the common goals that are truly fulfilling.
It's obvious that markets work, but in my opinion extreme unregulated capitalism is addicting in the same way that gambling is,
Isn't it obvious who wins when you play the slots? There's a reason organized crime invests in casinos.

A lot of the (lower to middle class) right wing supporters that I meet, who endorse all sorts of values like, "don't tax the rich" and "don't help the poor," a lot of these folks seem to buy into the dream that someday they will be pulling in a million dollar salary, they will be rich. Or even that they could already be rich without taxes.

It's scary how the American dream makes slaves of the poor in much the same way that casino psychology works. "Just keep working the slots, someday I'll strike it rich, someday I'll achieve the dream." Just keep working at that job you hate,
someday...someday...someday...

Then one day, you wake up and you're life is over and you struggled the whole time, "pulling the slot machine handle," competing against everyone else instead of cooperating within communities for the common goals that are truly fulfilling.

It's obvious that markets work, but in my opinion extreme unregulated capitalism is addicting in the same way that gambling is,

Isn't it obvious who wins when you play the slots? There's a reason organized crime invests in casinos.

>> ^marbles:

And price changes from an increased "supply" of currency is called inflation.

Before I get into the rest of what you said, I want to just highlight this part because it's an example of the root problem with your entire reply.

You seem to have this habit of making tautological arguments that hinge on asserting that the premise you wish to prove is baked into the very definition of some word, and therefore you don't need to actually make an argument for said premise.

I've been here with you before, about a word whose definition is much fuzzier than inflation (liberty), but now you're doing it with a word whose definition is very specific, and clearly does not contain the premise you want it to contain.

This is also my answer to your disagreement about the meaning of fractional reserve banking.

This is also my answer to your disagreement about what modern-day Keynesian monetary theories say. I'll also add that your quote isn't a Keynes original, it's Keynes quoting Vladimir Lenin.

As to your very last bit, you have a funny idea of what "earned honestly" means. Supposedly you resent banks gambling with our savings. Did they honestly "earn" our savings?