search results matching tag: middle class

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.003 seconds

    Videos (100)     Sift Talk (11)     Blogs (6)     Comments (851)   

Bill Maher: New Rule – There's No Shame in Punting

heropsycho says...

First off, he's not talking about everyone who plays video games. He's talking about people who ONLY play video games to the point that they're socially maladjusted. Big difference.

And even if he was talking about the geekier video gaming crowd, I don't even understand why it even registered on your radar as insulting. If you're a group that's actually discriminated against broadly, fine, but nerds? In this day and age of Mark Zuckerburg and Bill Gates? Really?!

It reminds me of this Louie CK bit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AbxHo9ybD0

"You can't even hurt my feelings."

Us poor nerds these days, with our solid paying upper middle class jobs and even higher, with college degrees! Pity us!

Just have the ability to laugh at yourself from time to time. Trust me, it's all going to be ok.

ChaosEngine said:

yeah, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't call it out.

It's a lazy stereotype and honestly, these days it's about as funny, original and accurate as saying "hah! women! everyone knows they can't play sports!"

If you're going to pull out a lazy stereotype at least be funny with it.

The Politics of "Parks and Rec"

ChaosEngine says...

Sorry, no. There isn't some moral equivalency here where everyone is entitled to their opinion and we should respect them for it.

Both of those people are white, straight and comfortably middle class. It's easy to get along then.

The republicans of today are a joke. This is a party where Rick fucking Santorum is still an elected official! Where Donald Trump is almost certainly going to be their presidential nominee and he's not even the worst of them (fuck you Ted Cruz).

It's really simple.

If you're against gay marriage, you're not "promoting family values", you're a homophobic neanderthal.
If you support banning muslims from your country, you're not "securing your borders", you're a bigoted asshole.
If you think forcing women to go through vaginal ultrasounds to get an abortion is ok, you're not "pro-life", you're a misogynist.
And if you really think that climate change isn't happening... then you're a fucking idiot.

There isn't a middle ground here. The fact that these issues are even up for debate is depressing as hell.

Socialism explained

shagen454 says...

I always find it bewildering that the majority of republicans don't even have that much money but they tow the party line; while the staunch uber-wealthy hate taxes as if they hate US democracy.

The thing is, the uber-wealthy are the ones that have made 1000%+ wealth gains for decades while wages have remained stagnant for the rest. They are the ones that own businesses and have perpetuated this warfare. If they paid *a little more tax* they wouldn't even feel it. But, for the working class a two dollar raise is fucking huge. The system we have needs more regulation, more services, more taxes in order to create checks & balances and to be put on track for more equal standards of middle-class living (you know the class the upper class has all but wiped out with their disgusting satan-esque greed with a Martha Stewart twist) for a vaster amount of the populace.

Louis C.K.'s Horace and Pete - Politics

SDGundamX says...

Heh, I made a similar argument years ago to a friend of mine but I wasn't so harsh on the common people.

I don't think it is so much that people are sheep as it is the fact that the system is designed to keep people as preoccupied as possible with their own survival so that they simply can't afford to be truly political activists.

Think about it--in the U.S. you can be legally fired from your job, for example, for expressing political opinions your boss disagrees with. It isn't a freedom of speech issue because freedom of speech only prevents the government from censoring your speech--not private business. Hell, it doesn't even have to be a political opinion. When someone wears an ostensibly "offensive" Halloween outfit and pictures of it show up on the Internet, they can be fired without having any kind of recourse.

Now you add on top of that how the middle class has been eroded away. A lot of families need dual incomes just to survive. That means you also need to pay for childcare if you have kids. Prices have increased but wages haven't kept pace. Now add debts on top of all this, whether it be from college loans, credit cards, car payments, mortgages, or whatever.

What you get from all this is a society where, as bad as things are in Washington, it's not bad enough for people to risk their already precarious circumstances by boycotting work to attend protests or engaging in some other form of extreme activism that would probably be required to effect real changes. A lot of people are one bad circumstance away from, if not bankruptcy, then at least a drastic lifestyle shift where they'll lose most of their personal belongings and possibly dreams (like having their kids go to college).

So things plod along pretty much the way they always have, with those in power continuing to consolidate that power and see how far they can push it. Barring college students with pretty much nothing to lose (they have both the free time and probably economic freedom to protest and engage in political activism), the best most people can do is gripe about things on the Internet.

Bernie's New Ad. This is powerful stuff for the Heartland

enoch says...

@bobknight33
"socialism is not american"

i swear sometimes bob i dont know what the fuck you are talking about.

even when people put out,quite correctly i might add,that america has socialism in its economic structure.you respond like they didnt state anything.

it is like you live in this weird bubble and that any information that attempts to enter,that may possibly contradict your own personal understandings.

so when i say that you can have a socialist democracy,i am not just pulling that out of my ass:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism

or that america already has socialist programs,and a majority of them YOU and your children enjoy:
https://mises.org/blog/bernie-sanders-right-us-already-socialist-country
(this is from the von mises institute.not exactly a bastion of liberal/progressive ideology.just in case you wanted to pull that tired and stupid response:well,they are a liberal website blah blah blah)

so if YOU think that socialism is SO bad and harmful and utterly un-american.let us revert to a pure capitalist society shall we?

here are the things that we will be saying goodbye to in your new capitalist america:
1.child labor laws.
thats right...your 8 yr old grandchild can now quit her fucking whining and get to fucking work.hmmmm...nothing like forced labor for the children working 14 hr shifts with no breaks,and 6 days a week.no work on sunday!
because:god.

2.minimum wage.
gone will be a basic minimum wage imposed by federal law.now we shall see the TRUE market place in action! of course,since there is surplus of available workers and there is no minimum.we can exploit the most desperate and vulnerable of our society and pay them 25 cents an hour!
take THAT china!

3.public schools.
education? only if your are part of the new american aristocracy! and what child will be going to school for an education? they are too busy working at the plant! pfffft..education.it is over-rated anyways.

4.fire and police.
now why would i spend my hard earned money in taxes, so my neighbor can be protected from fire damage and property damage? pay for your own protection fuckface! oh...you're too busy working 3 jobs,making .25 per hr? and your kids are working too? aww too bad loser.shoulda pulled yourself up by your bootstraps.

5.voting.(yep.you read that right)
i am a hard working american.who pays his taxes and owns property AND a business! and i JUST gave my employees a raise to .27 per hour! i have a RIGHT to vote! why should those non-property owning losers get a vote as well? i am obviously far more important than they are.whats next? women voting? the horror.

6.social security and medicaid.
now why would we waste time and resources providing a safety net for those losers again?how is it MY responsibility that they couldnt plan for their sunset years? i did give them a raise didnt i? fucking crybabies.and so what if they actually PAID into those programs.i feel better creating my own reality by calling those programs "entitlements",because it makes me feel morally superior to them.

7.public libraries.
there is that pesky "education" again.why should i be responsible for someone else family and their access to literature and information?what do you think i live in? a society? with neighbors? communities?this is just more government intrusion upon MY life and MY freedoms!

look man,i know i am being a cheeky shit in this comment,and i am not anti-capitalist..at all.
capitalism has brought great things for society as a whole..BUT..there is a difference between capitalism and unfettered capitalism,and what we have now is NOT capitalism.

it is socialism for the rich:
see: the bank bailout
see: corporate subsidies (welfare)
see:corporate tax breaks (welfare)
see:our current political system which has been totally over-run by corporate money.a corporate coup de'tat.
which we are all fed the bullshit line of how wonderful captialism is,but the only beneficiaries are corporations,wall street and the dept of defense.

the only people that get to engage in capitalism are the poor and middle class,because actually having to compete is for suckers and losers.

Teacher Dancing With His Students Has Already Won 2016

newtboy says...

Your last statement is why I can't understand why any middle class or lower Republican would have children. (just to single out one group for the sake of argument, I really can't see why anyone would have children today...but I digress)
They complain (often with good reason) that public schools are terrible and teach next to nothing, but they have no alternative that they can afford. If they really believe schools are as bad as they say, why would they have a child before they had the funds to keep and educate one?

Esoog said:

His school is very impressive, but I wonder if it would scale. Could we do this everywhere? I think we could, with enough buyin from government.

They have a tuition scale: https://fluencycontent-schoolwebsite.netdna-ssl.com/FileCluster/TheRonClarkAcademy/Mainfolder/RCA-Admissions-Class-of-2020-DOWNLOAD.pdf

For a household like mine, its a bit expensive to attend. ~$10,000 a year. I think he's doing a lot of things right for education, but at that price, its simply not scalable. My wife teaches in a low income area where some families can barely afford an $8 t-shirt.

tofucken-the vegan response to turducken

eoe says...

@newtboy: Just to be clear, I really appreciate your comments. It's nice to talk to an omnivore who doesn't just respond with "I'LL EAT TWICE AS MUCH MEAT AS YOU DO TO MAKE UP FOR YOUR VEGANISM!" I'm trying to be objective, and I appreciate your attempt as well.

That being said...

I respect the genuine care you give to your animals. I didn't know you or your family (or both) owned such a farm. It does sound like you do, truly, meet their needs as animals. However, (and I hate to bring out the really controversial stuff), I'm sure plenty of slave-owners treated their slaves with genuine humanity. But that doesn't excuse the categorical enslavement of other beings. Despite all care given to those animals, they are still not able to live their natural lives as animals on earth. I don't see why our subjugation, no matter how "humane", can be considered anything less than "inhumane".

Now, the comparison to "most children in the world" is a moot one. Yes, of course everywhere there are going to be worse things happening. But the point is that we are rational, (hopefully) decent, higher-order-understanding-of-the-universe beings. Humans seem to like to cherry-pick when their huge brain is an excuse for greatness, or ignored and "we're just animals after all". So, just because there is suffering outside the scope of our influence, we do all have the ability to stop eating meat. Pretty easily, in fact, since there are tons and tons and tons of other means to get all the nutrition we need (not to mention way, way healthier means).

The point is that we are completely and totally (especially as upper-middle class 1st-world citizens) capable of not eating meat this very moment. You can't, however, change the living conditions in the slums of India by yourself right now.

And explain to me how mentally handicapped humans are not animals. What is the distinction? They are both objectively less intelligent. If anything, animals are more capable of surviving on their own. What makes mentally handicapped people any more special than animals? Just because they're human? That seems arbitrary. True, they should be treated differently because they are different animals, but I mean why should one be treated to our moral consideration and one should not? What makes humans so damn special?

And that "sustenance" argument is really, really misguided. As said above, you can eat an entire vegan diet and be probably even more healthy than an omnivore. And animals are not minimally suffering. Yes, a very cherished, rare group, as your animals are, are "minimally suffering", but many, many, many, many more are being horribly abused for that sustenance that can be gained elsewhere (with suffering of its own, truly. I always hear the "well, there are people given slave wages to pick vegetables in California". But, you'll be eating those vegetables and fruits anyway. That's an entirely other battle that needs to be waged in other ways, not through lack of consumption).

My assumption was not that 100% of farmers treat their animals inhumanely. My assumption was that billions of animals are being treated inhumanely. And the way parents treat their children is a red herring. That's not my argument at all. And again, it's outside the realm of my influence.

And to counter your last argument... my same argument above follows for the "food chain/web" argument. Once and for all:

We are rational, amazing, smart, complex and powerful beings on this planet. We have it within our power (each of us) to not eat meat. This is "against nature". But so is basically OUR ENTIRE CIVILIZATION. What makes us truly different from animals is that exact ability. To step back and choose our actions. Are you saying humans not capable of choosing their actions -- those with so much in the 1st world countries? That we're all forced to, by nature, to eat meat? That is the cognitive dissonance I speak of. That we're so special because we are rational beings, but at the same time we must eat meat because we are not rational human beings.

This entire argument was not endorsed by PETA, because they're a bunch of assholes -- but despite being assholes one can't argue that they have brought about change. Change comes from all angles. Grassroots, insane radicals, scientists, humanitarians. They all try to bring change in different ways and succeed influencing different groups. PETA's brazenness is its power. Large corporations, like McDonald's, must respond to such a power. Despite being assholes. Both of them.

--

I want to end on a note of humility -- that I admit to having that same cognitive dissonance when it comes to animals. As a cat owner, I often visualize the mound of turkey carcasses that both of my lovable kittens live on top of. And they truly are carnivores in that they cannot find sustenance outside of meat. How do I rationalize all the turkey deaths (my cats only exclusively eat turkey for some goddamn reason) just so I can have my lovable pets? I can't. And it kills me. Not sure if I'll get cats after they die.

--

Thanks for reading. That was a lot.

newtboy said:

I'm sorry, you're wrong.
Not all farms treat their animals badly. Our Turkeys, for instance, had the run of 300 acres, as did our cattle, goats, and sheep. The chickens had a pen for their own protection, but one larger than an average house with a large roost house they had free access to and from. The all had proper veterinary treatments. All in all, they had a much better life than many humans with the exception of the freedom to leave the property.
Most children in the world live in worse conditions than the animals at OUR farm, and have a MUCH more painful, lingering death. The only atrocity about the situation to me is that there are so damn many human children.
And mentally handicapped people aren't animals. It may be true, forcing naked, mentally handicapped (or non-mentally handicapped) children to be outside 24/7 might be considered abuse...doing so with an animal is not.
Beyond that, you are making HUGE mistaken assumptions to make your point, mistaken assumptions about 1) how 100% of farmers treat their animals and 2) how 100% of parents treat their children.

Ahh...and my sustenance is more important to me than another being's minimal suffering....that's how a food web works, and it doesn't make me an asshole, it makes me an omnivore.

eric3579 (Member Profile)

radx says...

Did you see either of these?

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/10/goodbye-middle-class-51-percent-of-all-american-workers-make-less-than-30000-dollars-a-year.html

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/26/overcrowding-sharing-bed-housing

If you add the EPI's more detailed analysis of what the lowest basic budget for a family of four is in different parts of the US, the first link turns from depressing into outright infuriating.

As for the second link, I'll keep my comment as simple as it should be: a roof over your head is a fundamental right if you value human dignity at all, so that shit is fucked up beyond belief.

The Onion Looks Back At 'Back To The Future'

poolcleaner says...

Back to the Future.

Married with Children.

The Simpsons.

Ferris Buehler's anarchist ideology towards his and Cameron's upper class parents. Handing over the car keys to the lower class joy riders.

The Goonies going on adventures to prevent a golf course from overtaking their upper class lifestyle.

Was Mikey about to become middle class?! Holy shit. The Goonies is about retaining your social position in order to fund misadventure. And the rise of the middle class Hispanic family! i.e. Rosalita discovering the jewels in the marble bag.

Everything from the '80s involving a family was about -- Anyone? Anyone? -- Voodoo Economics.

dag said:

Quote hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

That's actually a pretty solid take on it for the Onion. As usual, it's funny because it's true. *promote

Bill Maher: Richard Dawkins – Regressive Leftists

gorillaman says...

Liberals oppose totalitarian ideologies automatically.

Read that sentence again. As far as I'm concerned, it's axiomatic. Consequent to that principle, no liberal will ever support or apologise for islam.

What we're seeing with our 'regressive leftists' is people who've been raised in an environment, the educated middle class say, in which liberalism is associated with goodness. Since they define themselves as good, they naturally also define themselves as liberal. They know that among the intellectual set to which they aspire, any admission of social conservatism will quite properly be met with contempt.

So, even while calling for censorship, even while defending the brutal and mindless suppression of individual freedom that is inherent in islam, these reactionaries delude themselves into believing that they're liberal.

Germany Caused the Crisis, Germany Must Solve It

coolhund says...

I am German myself and I am disgusted how the German media and politicians are only blaming Greece. Some conservative papers (like welt.de) are ticking out completely and are turning to phrases that are very close to our Nazi history and are not allowing overly critical comments.

How Germans could chop down wages so quickly and without much opposition from the people and other parties?
The main reason is Hartz IV. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartz_concept
Its a reform for the unemployed people, which at first sight doesnt have much to do with wages of the working people. But it does have everything to do with it. Let me explain:
Before Hartz IV unemployed people didnt have much to fear from the state. They got their unemployment (Sozialhilfe) money every month which was enough to live without much fear of anything. It didnt mean much to be unemployed. But people found a job if they wanted to. Of course, like every country, it was exploited by a tiny minority. People were happy with it and many countries were envious of that system because it provided so much social security that people got very peaceful and crime rates were pretty much non-existent.

Hartz IV was planned to cut the massive costs of that social system. The left wing government (which turned out to be massive hypocrites), a coalition of a socialist party and a green party, claimed it would decrease unemployment rates massively and save lots of tax money and they would force those lazy useless unemployed people to get jobs. They emphasized on "the hard earning people whos tax money is stolen by lazy unemployed" and used the tiny minority of exploiters to get Hartz IV under way. Hartz IV was basically a cut for unemployed people where they would barely have enough money to live from or pay the rent from it. It also allowed the government to use many tricks to adjust the unemployment rate. They for example excluded people who were unemployed at a certain age or people who were send on useless trainings (like how you write a job application or how you use a PC), which were forced on them from the government. If they didnt attend, they would get cuts on the already not enough Hartz IV money.

They got it through the parliament (since there was no oppositon of mention thank to their "democratic" coalition) and it went all downhill from there. Unemployed people were suddenly massively discriminated, even by the politicians, because they had created so much hate against unemployed and built many stereotypes in the process, supported by stupid fake shows in the media, just to push Hartz IV through. As I said before, they only used the minority that exploited the system before in their arguments, and didnt care about the majority. That also lead to companies falling for the created stereotype and not employing people who had been using Hartz IV at one time and even going as far as them looking at older employees as inferior. They got rid of them in a massive purge, which also led to the trick of excluding old people near pension-age from the unemployment statistics. Pensions dropped because those old fired people didnt get a job anymore and had to use Hartz IV. That meant that they had to use up their savings before they get Hartz IV money (that rule is part of Hartz IV), which drained old people of their money and also caused them to get caught in an even worse trap:
After a few years of getting Hartz IV money, they dropped to the lowest pension rate, which was barely above Hartz IV. It didnt matter if they worked 40 years of their life in a well paid job. Now they were poor and would never get a pension that was appropriate to their former job. That lead to a massive shift in wealth away from the normal people (middle class and poor), to the rich people. The buying power of Germans was destroyed, and it became even worse after the socialist/conservative government (yes, a stupid coalition like that is possible here) increased the sales tax by 3% to a whopping 19%. As result of this living costs exploded and black labor skyrocketed. Cost of energy of any kind, taxes, food prices, gas, rents, every day stuff you need increased massively. The Euro was to blame too, because prices of many things (especially food) were just exchanged 1-1 to the Euro. So for example if there was cheese before that cost 1 Deutsche Mark, it would now cost 1 Euro, even though 1 Euro was worth 2 Deutsche Mark. Wages collapsed, while everything got much more pricy. Hartz IV made all that worse.
Now for the main reason how Hatz IV pushed wages down:
The fear of dropping into Hartz IV (for the reasons I mentioned) was massive. Nobody ever wanted to drop into Hartz IV because they knew then everything was over. So they accepted extremely low wage jobs, even if that meant they would get less money than they would from Hartz IV, which already was barely enough to live a crappy live from. They took 2, 3, 4 shitty paid jobs instead, and the companies loved it, because they saved a lot of money with that. The problem with that was that even well educated people had fear of Hartz IV and accepted lower wages because of it. Wages didnt rise for 20 years (and they dont rise much now either). Yet living costs, as I said, increased massively. It all came together.
Germanys economy was very low at one point, yet they still tried to tell us that the unemployment rate dropped again (even 2007/08 and every year after that). People started to learn how they manipulated us and now we are here. Companies making revenue records after revenue records, yet nothing is arriving at the people. The media claims everything is well, the statistics still lie to us that the unemployment rate is low, but its not.
And now they are trying to blame the Greeks for our problems. Just like the unemployed Germans before, and the stupid masses fall for it again.
Yet they still wonder why Germans are a dying breed (population has been dropping for years now), and dont get that having children is very expensive in Germany and only few people still have money or time for that (since both women and men have multiple jobs to be able to live) because of these developments.

police detaining a person for no reason

newtboy says...

I must say, I wish it was alien to me as well. It is a disturbing thing to have to fear any interaction with those charged with my safety, but it's the only reasonable reaction when you have had the types of disrespectful interactions I've consistently had with police, no matter how compliant and respectful I was, invariably they are disrespectful, angry, and dishonest.

I grew up believing that cops were there to help citizens and that telling the truth to them is always the best thing to do. Personal and familial experience has dissuaded me of that belief thoroughly.

I'm also a middle-class, middle-aged, straight, white dude, but because I've lived in poor (largely black) areas I have been repeatedly targeted by police for 'sticking out'.

I've seen numerous close family members believe cop's lies, say too much trying to be helpful and/or truthful, and charged with crimes for what they revealed, or in some cases what the cop SAID they revealed. I've personally had cops lie on the stand about what I've said and/or done in their presence, and had them caught by the judge (lucky me) in the lies. Friends and family were not so lucky, and some of them did serious time for things they either did not do or things they were told would be ignored if they just told the nice friendly cops where the fireworks/pot/beer/anything they need to know about/etc. was, then when they tell the truth, officer friendly morphs into angry drill sergeant who charges them with any possible infraction he can think of and off to jail they go charged with the crimes they were promised would be ignored or crimes the officers created by lying.

When you see this behavior repeated time and time again, directed towards quite different people, one must conclude that it's an issue with those in the profession, not any personal issue by the victims. It's quite sad.

ChaosEngine said:

I have to admit, this kind of thinking is alien to me.

Maybe it's because I don't live in the US, maybe it's because I'm a middle-class, middle-aged, straight, white dude, but I simply don't have this kind of adversarial relationship with cops.

Even in the last few times I was in the US, every interaction I've had with police was courteous and respectful, even when I was in the wrong (like when I was pulled over for speeding).

Same in NZ. I don't have many official interactions with cops, a few random alcohol breath tests, pulled over once for speeding, but again they've always been fine.

Now, I absolutely would take this line if I encountered a situation like the one portrayed here, but as a general rule, I don't think most cops are out to get me, and again, maybe that's just because I'm not their target demographic.

police detaining a person for no reason

ChaosEngine says...

I have to admit, this kind of thinking is alien to me.

Maybe it's because I don't live in the US, maybe it's because I'm a middle-class, middle-aged, straight, white dude, but I simply don't have this kind of adversarial relationship with cops.

Even in the last few times I was in the US, every interaction I've had with police was courteous and respectful, even when I was in the wrong (like when I was pulled over for speeding).

Same in NZ. I don't have many official interactions with cops, a few random alcohol breath tests, pulled over once for speeding, but again they've always been fine.

Now, I absolutely would take this line if I encountered a situation like the one portrayed here, but as a general rule, I don't think most cops are out to get me, and again, maybe that's just because I'm not their target demographic.

newtboy said:

It is NOT in your best interest to remain cooperative with a cop....EVER. If they ask you a question, it's only asked to find a crime to charge you with. ANY question you answer is enough for them to lie and say 'he sounded drunk/high/angry/slow/like he was lying' and continue interrogating and investigating you, or just plain arrest you, then claim you said something completely different (prime example: see this video where she claims he never said he didn't smoke, although the video proves he DID say he never smoked in his life, but cops are all 'professionally' trained liars and most will lie about you to find something to charge you with). Don't give them a thing to twist into something to investigate or charge you with...not a god damn word. If you say nothing, they can't twist it into something actionable.

Real Time with Bill Maher: Ding Dong Racism Is Dead

GenjiKilpatrick says...

So I been avoiding layin' into the racists on the site for a bit.
Because it's like fighting with a brick wall with your forehead, stupid and bad for my health.

But this point - 1:36 - about how racists are much more politically correct than openly, unapologetically racist is true.

@lantern53
@bobknight33
@quantumushroom
@Trancecoach
And @shinyblurry if I remember correctly

Most of the comments these numbskulls post are inherently racist as fuck.

But they always use the excuse of some political or religion cop-out, like.

"If black people started voting Republican, instead of supporting Libtard Democrats who only want to keep them poor.."

I'm convinced they all think, on a daily basis:
"Well my white, middle-class life was tough. And I overcame!

I know! Better take to the interwebs and give those silly black folks some advice.

Yeah, some helpful, common sense advice like.. GET A JOB YOU LAZY VIOLENT SAVAGES!

Wow, ahem.. excuse me...

But really, your struggles are just imaginary black people.

Stop complaining about the VIOLENT THUGS erm.. questionably innocent people the police murder because they definitely deserved it.

Besides black people kill black people all the time, I heard on Fox News once.

So it's definitely not okay to make a big fuss when Law Enforcement Office very clearly unlawfully execute one of you coons.. er.. folks.

Just get up off your lazy asses and vote. It's always worked for me and my elder white voting block friends who are in no way disenfranchised by our current voting laws ."

*Crack knuckles, dusts shoulders*

"Yuuup. Good thing I helped those ignorant jiggaboos understand how the world REALLY is.

And that's why White Americans are god's SUPERIOR chosen people.

Oh yeah! and clearly no I said can be construed as racist because I'm not because Obama is the first black president.

..an UNTRUSTWORTHY, FOREIGNER who's really from KENYA or INDONESIA (you know, one of those icky brown countries) and that DOESN'T STAND FOR MURICA VALUES!!

But he's blackish and the president so, see.

Ding Dong! No racism here."

Anywho have fun jerk your collect bigot boners about how i'm wrong.

How blacks are just as equals as whites because you say so.

How your not racists even tho you say shit only racist say.. ugh.

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Paid Family Leave

Mordhaus says...

Again, you are misrepresenting the road tax. There is literally no way that you do not use the road or travel system in some fashion unless you walk everywhere cross-country and make no other trips other than for food and work. Even if you ride a bike on a road or take a bus/train, you are using the transport system and therefore should have to pay for it.

Most of the rest of your points about education and healthcare are opinions and I refuse to waste time on them.

The numbers I listed are per dollar per family. I fell I've been very transparent on this and the fact that you continue to rail against it is doing nothing to impress upon me that I am wrong. The numbers are accurate. As far as the middle class, it is still the largest portion of our class structure. Yes, it is shrinking and this should be addressed, but it is what it is at the moment. They are the average American still.

Some of them are happy with it. There are numerous articles from Norwegians discussing their unhappiness with the system, especially since they are having an influx of poor immigrants like the rest of Europe. They suddenly do not like having to pay for people who moved to their country, odd right?

The idea of being the same as everyone else is a fucking cultural meme in Norway and similar countries, its called the Law of Jante. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante. Again, I feel I have been very clear and open on this and you are pissing me off by picking at it like i'm making it up. I don't make stuff up, I find facts and I list them. If the facts do not agree with your viewpoint, that is not my problem.

Finally, we are so far off the topic at this point and you continue to nitpick my facts instead of disproving them, so I am done.

newtboy said:

It depends...social security, about 1937, medicare, more like 65, public schools, that depends on what you want to call different systems, but in North America it started in 1647
https://www.raceforward.org/research/reports/historical-timeline-public-education-us
The road bit is a PERFECT example of how, even if you don't directly use a service, you benefit from others using it....just like EVERY OTHER SERVICE MENTIONED.
Because we don't deny medical services to those without money, it's a question of do you pay less beforehand or more later, because either way you pay.
Because uneducated children cost society FAR more than educating them does, standing on your myopic moral high ground demanding 'personal parental responsibility' is a self defeating stance demanding people 'give' more than some have to give with no option for the children of the poor. (That said, I can get behind the 'public schools being free only for the poor' plan I think Jefferson had, as long as those schools are on par with private one's)
I explained clearly why even those average numbers are misleading.
Again, is that purchasing power per dollar, per person, or what?
OK, 'middle class' is not the average American. How about give the average American salary instead of cherry picking a rapidly shrinking sub-group that makes your point?
We all pay through the nose...it's just about when and how. You pay for the indigent by paying higher insurance and medical bills...it would be FAR cheaper to simply pay for their medical care in the first place (as in single payer health care). That saves the 10-25% that insurance companies take as profit on day one, and saves on overall medical care cost per person by properly taking care of people instead of waiting until there's an expensive emergency to pay for. (and makes a much healthier, so happier society as a whole)
The fact is that they are happy with their system. It does not make them all 'perfectly equal', there are rich and poor in Norway...or do you not believe that? People DO get ahead in Norway, probably more so than the average person in America who has seen their financial/social status in life, purchasing power, benefits, opportunities, and security go backwards over the last 40 years, unlike Norway.
No, I think the entire 'identical to everyone else' thing is something in YOUR head, not theirs, and not reality.
Don't have disposable income?!? In Norway, not the US?!?! You've GOT to be kidding. Let's ask someone who lives there...@BicycleRepairMan , is there only one social class in Norway, all equal, all making the same amount of money, all poor and destitute with no disposable income?
Well, the American system certainly disagrees with you. Those that put the most effort into their jobs usually make FAR less than those that put little effort into taking advantage of the opportunities available to them, but not to others. Those that make more in our society almost NEVER do it with manual labor, the hardest work to do. They also rarely do 2 or 3 full time jobs, as many poor must do. It's simply not true that working harder gets you advancement in the US, opportunity and connections get you advancement.
I do agree, giving medals for average/expected performance is ridiculous, but that rarely happens in business.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon