US: Unemployment

bwhitz

@cosimo_bullo "'So long as I live... I hope and pray I never believe such drivel.'

Thank you. Me too."

Hell, me too! And I'm the one who said it!

But really, these issues are REALLY REALLY big. Really big! We're talking about SEVER resource and energy shortages and over-population. Helping each other and being compassionate are great things... don't get me wrong. But they are just not "solutions" so to speak. They'll help us get though tough times... but they won't prevent them. We need serious analytical thinking and re-designing of global infrastructures if we're going to build... a future worth living for. (hahahah so cliche, I couldn't resist)

What makes one family or society happy... may not hold true for another. This is why solutions need to be based on objective reason, rather than on emotions.

cbrandin

@VK

I agree completely, but one has a right to only that - not the right to loud anonymity.

cbrandin

So is the drivel you hope to believe is that compassion and helping each other play no role? This is a false dichotomy.

brianluce

@bwhitz
"Explaining quantum mechanics to a 5th grader is difficult, just like trying to explain my "cold robot-logic" is difficult to someone who is just interested in the humanitarian aspects of society. I wasn't implying that he had the intellect of a 5th grader. "

1) you're not particularly logical at all. In fact, if I had a dollar for every non sequitur you've used, I wouldn't be interested in the GH2 hack because I'd have enough cash for a RED Epic.
2) Who says I'm only interested in the humanitarian aspect? I'm interested in solutions. A good solution should include humanitarian and pragmatic elements.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

>this is one very good thing

I doubt this "good thing" statement.
Every guy must have ability to do stupid thing, dangerous things, say fuckingly strange things.
This is nature. Going from nature is bad thing.

cosimo_bullo

@davhar -

>Being "more compassionate" and "helping each other" are not really going to cut it... it's much bigger than that.

'So long as I live... I hope and pray I never believe such drivel.'

Thank you. Me too.

cbrandin

Yeah, my situation is just a precursor to what everybody will be faced with eventually. With all the unfortunate things that come with the internet - this is one very good thing.

bwhitz

@cbrandin "It seems unfathomably ridiculous - but to be honest, it keeps me from saying anything I don't really mean - and that's a good thing."

Yea, that's definitely good. Especially in a few years down the road... everything we do on the web will be made public. Scary... but I guess if we want access to all this great knowledge and information, it's going to come at a price. Best to start practicing sooner than later. :)

cbrandin

@bwhitz

Try testifying in court as an expert. I have to disclose everything I have ever said publicly or published anywhere. It's incredibly stressful because I have to justify everything I've ever said or written. It seems unfathomably ridiculous - but to be honest, it keeps me from saying anything I don't really mean - and that's a good thing.

cbrandin

OK, good enough. Part of the advantage of the internet is that we can refine things in real time - which is a good thing. Precision is good - even when it takes a couple of rounds to get there. Let's just hope that things are presented in context, rather than in isolation. Ha, if we were in politics, there would be no chance of that!

bwhitz

@cbrandin "Well... actually you did say it - either that or you made a manipulative and inappropriate analogy."

I'd say more of a "rushed" analogy. I should have picked something that was further from the source material as to avoid people miss-reading it. I was just typing fast and it was the first thing that popped into my head.

I forget sometimes that there are people here from different backgrounds and parts of the world. What reads as sarcastic and hyperbolic to me... may read very literally for others.

It's hard to debate on the internet sometimes. The slightest variation in inflection, in person, that make-or-break a statement's intended message, doesn't work in typed-form. I'll have to make sure my statements read more correctly before posting from now on.

@astraban "Ps : to say the true, I really regret my poor english. It s very rare here to debate seriusly w/ a rock solid libertarian guy. And even if I m totally against your ideas(!!), I respect them and you - not considering you like an idiot."

Yes, you too! Debate is always good as long as people don't get too personal. Which, from the looks of it, it may be getting to that point...

BTW, I almost majored in Sociology! haha go figure. That's why film is so interesting to me... It's almost like applied sociology/psychology.

cbrandin

Well... actually you did say it - either that or you made a manipulative and inappropriate analogy.

So do you have a sufficient understanding of quantum mechanics to explain it to anybody - or are you just playing? I wonder, are you knowledgeable about the humanitarian aspects of society as well as the non-humanitarian aspects of society (whatever that means)? I see no evidence that you have any awareness of that side of things at all, or at least no interest. So who is lacking?

bwhitz

@cbrandin "And does @brianluce have the intellect of a 5th grader?"

No I never said that. I was just making an hyperbolic-analogy of two extremes.

Explaining quantum mechanics to a 5th grader is difficult, just like trying to explain my "cold robot-logic" is difficult to someone who is just interested in the humanitarian aspects of society. I wasn't implying that he had the intellect of a 5th grader.

cbrandin

No, you mean you object because he doesn't agree with you. If this logic had always existed we would have never progressed beyond our reptilian brains. Might does not make right. Evolution is about more enlightened, verses naive, standards. The ultimate manifestation of naivete is cynicism, as it is the way that people of limited understanding can feign wisdom. Cynicism = naivete + ugly. We assume that there is a sweetness that comes with naivete - simply not true. No cynic ever did anything to improve the lot of humanity - it's just a cop out. Cynics are just impotent people who are unable to participate in the advancement of humanity, relying instead on notions like "the ends justifies the means". That's cynical, I know - but the only way to combat cynicism is to fold it on on itself.

So, do you have an analytic understanding of quantum mechanics? And does @brianluce have the intellect of a 5th grader? You may want to skate on having said that - but you can't. We have to live with the implications of what we say, not just the overt statements. An unwillingness do do so is passive aggressive.

Chris

bwhitz

@astraban

Well, neither view is true... or false.

Humanitarianism will lead to a more emotionally stable society (probably) but with the trade-off of progress. Resources will be spend on improving everyone's quality of life. Science and industry will have to take a backseat.

With my view, society may be more emotional unstable and competitive, but progress will happen faster, with the possibility that we will reach a "Type-1" civilization faster. In theory, a type-1 society will have solved energy and resource problems on earth and we will not even have the energy/power problem anymore. It will be the democracy of energy. This could be the foundation of a Utopic society...

@brianluce "Unfortunately your personal theory of social evolution isn't quantum mechanics. To the contrary, You've reduced one of the most complicated subjects to an either/or construction of two cliche, sophomoric and clumsy choices."

Well, first of all, it isn't my theory. It's just the one that has the least contradictions... so I believe it to be true for now. I didn't really come up with it or anything like you're suggesting.

"The presumptuousness in your argument is at astonishing levels."

Oh well, it is what it is I guess. What-evs. I guess I'm just a compassion-less, presumptuous, jerk-face. I guess I should go back to sharing-school or something... :)

brianluce

@bwhitz
"That's only because you don't understand it. It's like trying to explain quantum mechanics to a 5th grader... of course it's going to sound ridiculous. "
>>>>>>>>>

Unfortunately your personal theory of social evolution isn't quantum mechanics. To the contrary, You've reduced one of the most complicated subjects to an either/or construction of two cliche, sophomoric and clumsy choices. The presumptuousness in your argument is at astonishing levels.

astraban

I m just saying that your scientist vision of progress of civilizations may sound modern but is an old dusty useless dream of some XIXe century fools... Like my humanitarian ideas that s true!! ;-)
for you I have to scientificly study the civilization stories before arguing. For me you have to just understand basic sociology (yeah I teach that crap AND medieval history!) to see that on social reality your utopia is out topic.

Ps : to say the true, I really regret my poor english. It s very rare here to debate seriusly w/ a rock solid libertarian guy. And even if I m totally against your ideas(!!), I respect them and you - not considering you like an idiot.

bwhitz

@brianluce "A silly dichotomy here. Really. This is ridiculous."

That's only because you don't understand it yet. It's like trying to explain quantum mechanics to a 5th grader... of course it's going to sound ridiculous. But I can assure you, I've thought out many scenarios, and the ones I've mentioned are pretty contradiction-free. I use to believe in Altruism and such... but when dissecting my though patterns, I found many contradictions, leading me to the conclusion (even though it I was afraid of it at first) that those principles were false.

Also, I'm not saying anyone is wrong... it's just different views that lead to different outcomes. Nothing can inherently be right or wrong. So sorry if any of this comes of as personal, it's not meant to be... it's just debate.

brianluce

@bwhitz
"Wrong. If I had a "me first" ethic. I would be FOR government hand outs... so that I could just stop working and sit on my butt all day. "
>>>>>>>

Very few people like and enjoy being on welfare. It's humiliating and provides a standard of living at the poverty line. So don't say you'd want it, you don't.

"Umm... actually it's for protection from other nations and to uphold constitutional laws that protect our individual freedoms. This is basic. "
>>>>>>>>>>>

Yes, as I already said, government was created to benefit the masses. In democratic governments that might include upholding the law and protecting human rights, or it might not. Most governments and nation states throughout history aren't democratic though.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

"You're correct here actually. That's why I originally said "IQ tests and such". Obviously, current IQ tests would have to be revised to test for other things like creativity, mental stability, and logical reasoning. Not just information regurgitation... we have computers for that now. ;)"

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<br />
IQ tests have never tested the "Regurgitation of information". And good luck finding any standardized exam that tests mental stability and creativity.

"Again, there are no right or wrong answers. There are only choices. We can chose to help all the current humans by dividing up the current wealth and giving everyone a equal slice (this would end our social evolution and stagnate the human race... it's also very selfish) or we continue to let evolution take it's course, leave social Darwinism unchecked, and reach a global type-1 civilization some day... which will be good for everyone and end most problems we're disusing now."

>>>>>>>

A silly dichotomy here. Really. This is ridiculous.

Ian_T

@astraban You're right....there are dumb people everywhere. But I speak only of my own experience with the people I've met. I don't trust statistics. In many cases information like that is skewed. And like the media it can be lopsided enough to make a certain group look bad. The sad part about it all is people actually buy into that propoganda crap. Which is why I brought up that story.

bwhitz

@astraban "I don't know what is the most scary part of your analysis : the conclusions or the fact that you (and many others I'm sure) genuinely believe it's true... Brrr!"

It is true. Your fear of it is clouding your, and many other's judgments. It is human though, people fear what they don't understand. We're emotional animals, we like ideas that appeal to us on those levels the best. Once you learn to think on a non-emotional (objective) level, the answers become very obvious... although most people would fear and dismiss them, which is why it takes so long to implement change. If everyone though objectively, we could fix the world for everyone in about 50 years. This will probably never happen though.

And "level-1" society talk is not pseudo scientific. Again, your only saying that because you don't understand. There is a real scale physicists and astronomers use to rate the progress and milestones of a civilization. Until you study more into this field, please refrain from dismissing it as pseudo science.

"Progress of the humanity (or whatever) can only be achieved by raising the situation of the actual people living right now."

Wrong. This is Humanitarianism. Your mixing two different concepts. This is why it is important to establish premises before taking part in a debate. Anyways, there is no logical conclusion you can make that by improving the situation of everyone, that it will lead to progress. On the other hand, there is LARGE evidence that favoring the most adapt and intelligent will lead to progress. This is evolution... it's been pretty much proven. It's the reason you're typing on a computer right now, on the other side of the globe, taking part in this debate. And it didn't happen because of compassion, or helping, or any of that. It happened because smart/creative people had resources available to them and had the time and freedom to exploit them.

"And debate politics in an unknown language prove that I m stupid in some way..."

The point of this is not trying to prove anyone stupid... it's just the search for solutions.

astraban

Shame I didn't take seriously english lessons... But I give it a try. @bhwitz I don't know what is the most scary part of your analysis : the conclusions or the fact that you (and many others I'm sure) genuinely believe it's true... Brrr! Your vision of the "progress" like something of the future that would benefit one day to humanity (level 1 or whatever pseudo-scientific assesment) is... What s that? I don t give a shit of thoses utopian fairy tales : in the end a lonely old genius remain in a spaceship kubrickian way. Useless. if progress don t serve immediatly to raise standart (education, medical, culture, etc) for the majority then all the rest is crap : not darwinism but eugenism. I don t accuse thoses who believe in thoses crap to be nazis, just short minded. Progress for progress without benefit for all is stupid. Maybe it s sellfish to think like that. Good, sellfinesh is good advise sometimes.

And for the racial part : shit don't just happen. If all thoses stats on black people are so negative it s not the result of bad luck (damn how can someone see social reality like that) or the so called "choice" (good/bad) made by thoses who are in such situations - but eh, there s hope cause black love to sing and dance and are going to succeed in our "societe du spectacle"... I Hope its a (bad) joke.

Its just happen that racial reality are crossing social realities. Poor without access to culture (to be short) are going te reproduce their situation. Period. For one story of a self made men (favorite fairy tale in the us; even among the poor for the satisfaction of oligarchy) million of poor and few riches just born/die in the condition of their parents : yeah shit happens, don t born poor (statstically better to not born black then).

Progress of the humanity (or whatever) can only be achieved by raising the situation of the actual people living right now. I m not Keynesian, but Keynes wasn't a sellfish poor thinking for its own good. Maybe he was just a smart sellfish rich who come out to the best (or the least worst) solution to protect his situation. If selfish rich don t want to be generous with the poor (and all the lazy, idiot among them) but are afraid of lumpen proletariat riots, they have to be logical. Build camp (stat of black/poor in prison?) or build school, rebuild welfare state to destroy social inegalities and offer to every genious of tomorrow regardless of their class the chance to succeed - and to the idiot the right to live and be happy too. Damn we re humans, not bugs...

Ps : I don t speak english so yeah major part of what I said doesn t make sense and don t reveal my thoughts (try to resume Bourdieu in chinese!). And debate politics in an unknown language prove that I m stupid in some way...

Ps 2 : @Ian_t europeans ppl don't think this or that about black americans... Some europeans are stupid and/or racist, some aren t, that's all.

Ian_T

LOL...Vitaliy look what you've started. I have a feeling this is going to get a bit more interesting.

davhar

@ you guys,

Wow. Relax already. Or npt. I don't know.

>Being "more compassionate" and "helping each other" are not really going to cut it... it's much bigger than that.

So long as I live... I hope and pray I never believe such drivel.

bwhitz

@brianluce "You've got yourself a "Me first" ethic, a major culprit IMHO for the trouble in the world right now. Uprisings in Israel, Libya, UK rioting, that's the backlash against your attitude."

Wrong. If I had a "me first" ethic. I would be FOR government hand outs... so that I could just stop working and sit on my butt all day.

"The socalled needs of the masses is the reason we have government and the nation state"

Umm... actually it's for protection from other nations and to uphold constitutional laws that protect our individual freedoms. This is basic.

"What a load of crap. IQ tests measure only a small area of human capability and it's probably one of the most useless useless areas. There are so many things it doesn't measure that are better predictors of achievement"

You're correct here actually. That's why I originally said "IQ tests and such". Obviously, current IQ tests would have to be revised to test for other things like creativity, mental stability, and logical reasoning. Not just information regurgitation... we have computers for that now. ;)

Again, there are no right or wrong answers. There are only choices. We can chose to help all the current humans by dividing up the current wealth and giving everyone a equal slice (this would end our social evolution and stagnate the human race... it's also very selfish) or we continue to let evolution take it's course, leave social Darwinism unchecked, and reach a global type-1 civilization some day... which will be good for everyone and end most problems we're disusing now.

If you chose the former because you're concerned that you may never see the type-1 utopia... then you're being selfish.

We're in for some rough times ahead. We need REAL solutions. Being "more compassionate" and "helping each other" are not really going to cut it... it's much bigger than that.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters