vimothy
yurp
I didn't call him a libertarian - it's his term.
I didn't call him a libertarian - it's his term.
vimothy
yurp
Sorry, are you saying that ghettos exist in a vaccum or that I said that?
Actually, I agreed with that several posts ago.
N
nomadologist
Guest
When I was talking about "ghettoes" of course, I did not literally mean they were erected by the government ad hoc then peopled with characters like you'd do in SimCity.
Are you making a stupid semantic argument because you know your "meritocracy" idea is a joke? Or is this just your lack of merit showing through again?
Are you making a stupid semantic argument because you know your "meritocracy" idea is a joke? Or is this just your lack of merit showing through again?
N
nomadologist
Guest
You made some sort of distinction between ABSTRACT IDEAS like markets and economies, and ghettoes, as if the two bore no relationship.
N
nomadologist
Guest
And now I'm finally seeing the light. Maybe some people are just dumb and shouldn't earn money.
vimothy
yurp
it's the government's fault black people live in ghettoes.
I'm officially not reading this thread anymore. After walking past a half dozen homeless crackheads when I walked by the projects this morning, I just can't stomach this kind of backward shit.
Because, you know, it's the crackhead's fault he's in the ghetto--it's not the US government that stole his ancestors and sold them into slavery or anything
We're no longer arguing about anything now, this thread was enjoyable when we were discussing politics and eocnomics, but there seems little point in arguing about whether I am stupid and lazy (because I'm poor), and why nomadologist's life is so peachy (she knows it's all bunk, you see, because she's doubly clever - clever enough to earn it, but also clever enough to see that she's doesn't deserve the money she earns, but makes anyway! How spiffing).
N
nomadologist
Guest
Why aren't we arguing "about anything"? If your theories are true, surely your logic applies to everyday situations and people?
Don't hate me for holding you to your own standards/"ideals".
Don't hate me for holding you to your own standards/"ideals".
N
nomadologist
Guest
Whose fault is it that we based an entire economy on slaves, then "freed" them into conditions we wouldn't let farm animals live in?
The government played no role in that?
Please explain how it happened, then.
The government played no role in that?
Please explain how it happened, then.
john eden
male pale and stale
C'mon nomadologist - it's quite clear that there was a DEMAND for slaves and it was entirely LEGAL to snaffle 'em up, so a SUPPLY was created.
This has lead to an incredible boost in the economy and widened the gap between the rich and the poor, which (as we all know!) is the best way to eradicate poverty once and for all.
Only a skunk smoking daytime tv watching doley marxist would fail to see how beautiful that is.
This has lead to an incredible boost in the economy and widened the gap between the rich and the poor, which (as we all know!) is the best way to eradicate poverty once and for all.
Only a skunk smoking daytime tv watching doley marxist would fail to see how beautiful that is.
Guybrush
Dittohead
I’m friends with a few city-bankers and, contrary to what Vimothy says, they argue that most any non-educated noob could do their work if given a month’s on-the-job training or so. Thus, I’m highly sceptical of anyone claiming that high wages are predominantly a function of ability. Such a claim also cannot satisfactorily explain why studies show that at the moment more women enter certain sectors of work, these sectors’ wage-level seems to stagnate, or even fall relative other sectors of work; the opposite goes for men entering sectors previously dominated by women.
N
nomadologist
Guest
roffle
vimothy
yurp
1. Slavery was the norm prior to capitalism, so it cannot explain capitalism, even if it is necessary but not sufficient.
2. As Sowell argues, slavery didn't stop black emancipation prior to the 1960s, so it need not stop it now. From City Journal:
How can there still exist a large black urban underclass imprisoned in poverty, welfare dependency, school failure, nonwork, and crime? How even today can more black young men be entangled in the criminal-justice system than graduate from college? How can close to 70 percent of black children be born into single-mother families, which (almost all experts agree) prepare kids for success less well than two-parent families?
The legacy of slavery and racism isn’t the reason, economist Thomas Sowell has long argued. That legacy didn’t stop blacks from raising themselves up after Emancipation. By World War I, Sowell’s data show, northern blacks scored higher on armed-forces tests than southern whites. After World War II and the GI Bill, black education and income levels rose sharply. It was only in the mid-1960s that a century of black progress seemed to make a sudden U-turn, a reversal that long-past events didn’t cause. Beginning around 1964, the rates of black high school graduation, workforce participation, crime, illegitimacy, and drug use all turned sharply in the wrong direction. While many blacks continued to move forward, a sizable minority solidified into an underclass, defined by self-destructive behavior that all but guaranteed failure.
The legacy of slavery and racism isn’t the reason, economist Thomas Sowell has long argued. That legacy didn’t stop blacks from raising themselves up after Emancipation. By World War I, Sowell’s data show, northern blacks scored higher on armed-forces tests than southern whites. After World War II and the GI Bill, black education and income levels rose sharply. It was only in the mid-1960s that a century of black progress seemed to make a sudden U-turn, a reversal that long-past events didn’t cause. Beginning around 1964, the rates of black high school graduation, workforce participation, crime, illegitimacy, and drug use all turned sharply in the wrong direction. While many blacks continued to move forward, a sizable minority solidified into an underclass, defined by self-destructive behavior that all but guaranteed failure.
Slothrop
Tight but Polite
Would that be 'solidified into an underclass' in a 'lacked class mobility' sense, ie the thing that we've already seen seems to be a problem with freer markets?
vimothy
yurp
I'm not.
You said that your job is proof that you're clever and I'm stupid and lazy, because I earn £16-17k p/a, and you earn £80-90K.
You were hired because the person who hired you thought that you could do the job based on your skills and knowledge, not based on your last name or your social group.
I never applied for the job. It's neither here nor there. Perhaps I could do it, perhaps I'm not skilled or experienced enough. The wage you earn doesn't represent your IQ, but the relative scarcity of the skills needed to fill the role, which is why, for instance, plumbers get paid so much in the UK at the moment.
The running example is faulty as well:
The fact remains that the fastest person wins the race. It doesn't matter if they were faster because they had better access to facilities, or because they trained harder, or because they are blessed with a more suitable physique. If you run faster, you win.
vimothy
yurp
Slothrop
Tight but Polite
http://cep.lse.ac.uk/about/news/IntergenerationalMobility.pdf
Intergenerational mobility (higher is less mobile, since the figure is a correlation):
US: .289
UK: .271
West Germany: .171
Finland: .147
Canada: .143
Sweden: .143
Denmark: .143
Norway: .139
So Canada's an exception. France isn't mentioned in the articles, although they have their own set of race based issues which probably makes them a bit of a special case.
N
nomadologist
Guest
Now I really think you're stupid. *I* didn't say jobs made people smart, YOU said only lazy, dumb people can't get good jobs.
Actually, part of why (maybe a lot of why) I was hired had to do with my ivy league education, which I (for reasons beyond my control) was able to manage while the vast majority of people from my region and similar financial circumstances couldn't, which have nothing to do with intelligence (I knew tons of kids who technically "got in" to top tier universities but couldn't afford it and couldn't go.) In America, "names" are not necessarily part of the privilege that's conferred upon people born rich. That's an old world thing.
Relative scarcity seems at first to explain *everything* or *anything*, but ask a business analyst: the reasons how and why a certain person gets a job has precious little to do with "merit" in many many cases.
I wasn't talking about "winning" a race in that analogy, either, obviously. I was talking about how having access to talent without access to wealth can be USELESS.
Do you miss the point on purpose, or are you really that stupid?
Last edited:
N
nomadologist
Guest
Who tried to use slavery to explain capitalism? I was asking how the government can be absolved for responsibility in first the propogation of slavery, and second, the aftermath when policies failed the emancipated slaves looking to start new lives.
If you think that nothing stopped black people from raising themselves up after emancipation, GO TO ANY INNER-CITY BLACK NEIGHBORHOOD IN THE U.S. There are ghettoes and ghettoes full of people who DID NOT COME UP.
1964 is not some sort of magic year. The problems that caused the ghettofication of the American inner-city have roots in hundreds of years of U.S. history.