*promote

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Thursday, June 26th, 2014 10:37pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter Trancecoach.

Excellent !

Really cool, thanks for the sift!

Gawd damn fuckin *quality!!!

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by lurgee.

You're damn right it is! Thanks.

Not for nothing, but Rick serves as yet another "poster boy" for how there will never be income "equality." Mr. Rubin would not be "equal" in salary to most people, whether there's a free market, a crony capitalist market, a socialist non-market, or a communist non-market.

Eminem, the Red Hot Chili Peppers, the Beastie Boys, Sir Mix-a-Lot, Lana Del Rey, Krishna Das, Johnny Cash, Adele, Rage Against the Machine, Run DMC, Danzig, Slayer, the (extremely versatile) list of course goes on and on (and on). That's why Mr. Rubin is in the 1%.. Because you (and tens or hundreds of millions of others) listen and like the albums that he produces and not the ones produced by most of the other wanna-be (or actual) "music producers."

But, of course, the envy-fiends have their "reasons" as to why they think they should be paid that kind of money and/or deserve (like mobsters do) to have a a piece of his pie.

Or that if you could only get others to vote in a certain way, you'd be Rick Rubin, or in his shoes. Such a conceit reinforces the obvious: you can only control your self. Little-to-no benefit comes from worrying about or trying to influence what other people do or don't do (especially when it has nothing to do with you and you can't do anything about it anyway). The conceit that anything else is the case leads to profound suffering on both the personal as well as on the social and political levels.

Of course, you can name a record producer who said such thing.

Do you never get tired of using the Straw Man fallacy? Or maybe you don't know what it is and can't tell the difference between what liberals actually say and what you fantasize they would say?

You seem to equate "envy-fiends" with "liberals" here. I suppose that it's an understandable conflation tho, seeing as how you seem to consider yourself to be a "liberal" and thus (possibly) know yourself an envy-fiend, and can therefore link the two as being evidently interchangeable.

Perhaps, as a "spokesperson" for "liberals," then, you'd like to clarify for me what it is that the envy-fiends "really" say?

And I'm curious, too, as to whether anyone (other than me) actually care what you (as a "liberal" spokesperson) think (aside from those who have their fun at your expense).

Just like Mr. Rubin would likely remain in the 1% in any system, whether the state is run by "liberals" or by "conservatives," so would the envy-fiends remain so, either way. (BTW, I'm not calling you an envy-fiend, but you made the link for whatever -- Freudian-or-other -- reasons that seem to be quite personal to you.)

Ha ha, see? You did it again. Straw Man fallacy. (I'm not a liberal by the way.)

Back on topic: He seems pretty hard to find, that mysterious envious record producer -- that would have proven me wrong in no time regarding you fantasizing and such -- as I can't help notice you could not come up with a single name.

You should probably read and understand what straw man fallacy actually means before suggesting that I've used it. For my argument to satisfy the criteria of a straw man, there would be no one saying that the 1% ought to be taxed more than they are. And, yet tens of millions (if not more) Americans either believe (or are lead to believe) that taxing the 1% would somehow decrease the amount of inequality that exists between (the likes of) them and (the likes of) Rick Rubin. I'm sure that many of them are actual or wanna-be 'record producers', but such an attempt to "come up with a single name" is in fact your attempt at a straw man fallacy, not mine.