>> ^coolhund:
This topic is just too much about politics and money to be taken seriously at the current state, but its already too late. Once again the poor would suffer from our self-righteousness the most and thats why most of the poor countries oppose our "solutions". Also nothing learned from history.


You're partially right in that climate change is about politics and money, but just not in the way you think.

Let's look at the two sides:

On one hand you have the majority of the worlds climate scientists. Now I don't know if you've ever met a climate scientist, but I can assure you they are not living on private islands and driving Ferraris. There really isn't any kind of profit motive for them to say that climate change is real. Other than the "grant money" which the right keeps harping on about. Are you kidding? In real terms, it's fuck all, and certainly nothing compared to what they could be getting if they were to shill for the anti-agw crowd.

Now on the other, you have the oil industry, various large manufacturers and so on. There is an enormous profit motive for them to deny climate change, but they know they can't fight the science, so they manufacture doubt. Hell they even set up a team to analyse all the data and it still came back in favour of climate change.

No-one wants AGW to be real. It is a massive pain in the ass for the entire world. Unfortunately, it is real, it sucks and now we have to deal with it.

Hello... Honda?

This is Mr. Peterson. Would you mind, explaining to me, how you manage to take a beloved movie, with a gorgeous Ferrari, and bastardize it by replacing the Ferrari with boring CRV?

Pardon my French, but you're an asshole!

[/best comment from link above]

All right, I'll say it. Romney's right. I am envious of millionaires. I would venture to say that most of my peers are "jealous" too... but for one reason, and one reason only:

If I had that much wealth (or a sufficient salary to reach that much in, say, 5 years of full-time work), I could rest a LOT easier and lead a far more relaxed life. I wouldn't have to worry about mortgage payments. I wouldn't have to worry about a medical emergency. I wouldn't have to worry about putting food on the table. I wouldn't have to worry about a child's college education. I wouldn't have to worry about retirement. Although not every one of those points apply to me (yet), there exist plenty of lower- and middle-income families for which all of those and more do.

That's it. There's nothing else. There were 3.1 million millionaires in the US at last count and obviously I don't and can't know all of them personally. It is patently illogical for me to begrudge and envy all of them in any way other than the element of financial security. I don't envy their boat; I don't enjoy that kind of recreation or the upkeep associated with it. I don't envy their second house; I only need one. I don't need a 60" plasma TV (or any TV at all for that matter, why, I have Videosift! <3). I don't need a Ferrari; the speed limit is 65 everywhere. And so on. It bears mentioning that most millionaires live very frugal lives themselves, anyhow.

What I do need are the basic essentials for living, enough that I can rest easy at night. And the bigger the safety net, the more comfortable I am.

Romney seems to think this envy is on the level of revolution and "class warfare." No. I don't give a single fuck about what millionaires do with their money. The problem is this: if you raise taxes 5% on the middle and lower classes, that could mean the difference between rice and beans vs. 3 square meals a day. Raise taxes 5% on the wealthy and the difference is keeping their BMW and Benz for 1 more year as opposed to trading up to the latest and greatest model.

TL;DR - Romney's right, but for the wrong reasons.

>> ^blutruth:

>> ^ctrlaltbleach:
Same action different view point.
http://videosift.com/video/Make-sure-to-secure-the-floor-before-d
riving-on-it

Huh...why didn't that show up when I was going to post it? The Mille Miglia NA tags were the same... Seems dupe-ish to me, if someone wants to do the honors...


Meh, leave it.

>> ^ctrlaltbleach:

Same action different view point.
http://videosift.com/video/Make-sure-to-secure-the-floor-before-d
riving-on-it


Huh...why didn't that show up when I was going to post it? The Mille Miglia NA tags were the same... Seems dupe-ish to me, if someone wants to do the honors...

I can't wait to get old...no stupid trainsets for me! I'm building a RC Ferrari with a V12!

Well... because the state provides very little in the US, the minimum wage should be a lot higher, considering people have to pay for health care from their own pocket, and it's not cheap either. Also, considering the price of sending a kid to college in the US, it should be even higher.

For me, and this is simply my opinion, 1 wage should be enought to support 2 people. Pay food and utilities for a month, pay the rent or mortgage (of a suitable house for 2 people, obviously a mansion would be too much), pay the car (obviously not a ferrari), pay for health care, and still have some left to put away, and little to be able to use on "luxuries" (like going to the movies, eating out, etc).
Paying people less than that, especially when the company paying the wages is very profitable, is not only disgusting, it should be illegal.

In europe, since we don't have to pay for health insurance, and tuition for college is about 900€ per semester, we can do with less.


>> ^bobknight33:

Just asking. What is a living wage from your point of view?

>> ^shagen454:
This is the problem. My parents cite this too, they say You do not want to tax the companies or the rich or they will leave. So what? Fuck them. If they wont pay a suitable living wage and feel they are being taxed too much then GET THE FUCK OUT. It is time for this country to rebuild with an ethical conscious at the heart of it.

>> ^Trancecoach:

Must be part of The Flat Earth Society.



You hit closer to home than you think:
http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/lessons/flaterth.vid.ws2.tch.pdf

"Google Dr. Leo Ferrari. They will find that he is, indeed, a university professor... of philosophy (he is NOT a scientist of any kind). He was also one of the founders (and past president) of the Flat Earth Society!"

(Said Leo Ferrari is best described here.)

>> ^ponceleon:

Needs the transformer sound added in...


And faster speed!

>> ^Trancecoach:

Isn't this surreal? What's unfortunate is that five years ago, we were applauding gross wealth disparities as if they were a good thing... not hating on Trump for this plane, but jealously hyping his "hard work."
How interesting to see the cultural shift in the last few years, eh? From envy to anger.


It's somewhat true - at least with me. Now when I see a Ferrari driving down the road I immediately think the guy is an asshole/crook/schemer.

>> ^Deano:

Yeah crush the Ferrari and then I'll be impressed.


Probably the Mayor's Ferrari.

Yeah crush the Ferrari and then I'll be impressed.

They won because theirs was one of only two that actually looked like a Ferrari (the other being the yellow one reminiscent of the Testarosa). The rest were just teenager fantasies.

@NetRunner

Thank you for the comments.

1. Walmart wages: It seems like most reasonable libertarian positions are different from anarchic positions in that they support a basic platform for prosperity, including basic protections for workers. Altruism, however, is defined as an uneven (irrational) trade, so this wouldn't qualify as altruism. Also, the libertarian definition of basic protections certainly wouldn't include extras like, for example, subsidized housing intended to allow low-contribution workers to live in the center of San Francisco, instead of having to commute into the city like everybody else.

2a. If someone wants a Ferrari (I don't, but some people do), the basic economic system allows anyone who's smart to become a millionaire within around 5 years (ask me more), so there is a path toward that. I might be misunderstanding your point, though.

2b. I just like science, intelligence, and prosperity, so the commonplace objection among libertarians (and liberals) to the state's monopoly on violence just seems to me like people expressing their simplistic instincts.

3. I think developing our personal human capital in extraordinary ways is already altruistic... our permanently less reasonable friends and community benefit more from us than we benefit from them.

4. Reverse intellectual darwinism is already a huge drain on reasonable people, so it seems good to oppose it where we can. Small costs in shipping add up to large costs nationwide over time.

@chilaxe, I'm just asking for some consistency from libertarians on their use of "voluntary" and "involuntary". Is asking Walmart to pay their workers better "involuntary altruism", since if they do it, it might mean prices might go up?

Also, where's the grand concern about "involuntary" participation in the market? I don't get to take a cruise in a Ferrari whenever I want. That's not because all Ferrari's near me are always in use by people with a more pressing need, but because we have this whole system in place where people can just hem them up in a garage most of the time because they "own" it. If I try to violate that system, I'll be subjected to state-based coercive violence!

Further, if your goal is to be altruistic, then be altruistic. Not having state-provided Ferrari service is a real downer, but it's nothing compared to how someone who has cancer and can't get treatment feels. If I'm altruistic, I'll set aside my Ferrari-related woes, and still try to help people who don't have health insurance. People who fixate on their own situation, and insist that it always take precedence over that of others aren't altruistic, they're selfish.

If your goal is to just be selfish, then a good way to go about it would be to complain about how unjust it is that you might be "subsidizing" someone who isn't you when you buy a 44 cent postage stamp, and use that unhappiness as a justification for why you oppose systemic measures to provide health care to the poor.

I suppose you could make the argument that this is about "tough love", that helping people just prevents them from learning important lessons about life. But the truth is crap like this isn't altruism, in either the literal or figurative case.