i think im becoming a republican..

[Smoblikat]

Welcome to the correct side.

 

[werepossum]

Welcome to the correct side.

Well, the least wrong side anyway. Usually. Sometimes . . .

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

.



The emotional trauma the rape victim experiences is a result of the stigma from a patriarchal value system. What is confusing to understand about that?

Whats confusing is how anyone could rationally believe that.

 

[Incorruptible]

Both of the political parties are corrupt but being a conservative is definitely a smart choice, Good job OP!

 

[poohbear]

Reminds me of the old joke...


A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself a very liberal Democrat and was very much in favor of redistribution of wealth. She was ashamed that her father was a staunch Republican.

Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.

One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes and the addition of more government welfare programs. He responded by asking her how she was doing in school. She answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, with no time to go out and party like other students. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend. Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Audrey doing?"

She replied, "Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA She is so popular on campus, college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over.

"Her wise father asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your 4.0 GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA."

The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I have worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree! She played while I worked my tail off!"

The father slowly smiled and said gently, "Welcome to the Republican Party"

So you're saying the majority of people who are rich are rich because they worked their asses off? I'm afraid the statistics completely disagree with you, middle class people (what's left of them) will most probably STAY middle class, rich will STAY rich, and poor people will STAY poor. This rag to riches story through "hard work" is extremely rare and a pipe dream. Rich people know this ofcourse, but they like to give the other classes hope. It takes money to make money, and only the Rich have that money to begin with.

 

[nehalem256]

Whats confusing is how anyone could rationally believe that.

This is what the quoted article said. Rape victims feel shame, which causes the emotional trauma. This shame logically stems from patriarchal values such as women may be at fault for enticing men, or that non-virgin women are less marriageable.

Or maybe you believe feminist values teach women to feel shame, resulting in emotional trauma, so that feminists can get more government funding for their activist organisations. But that is a far more disturbing proposition.

 

[drebo]

If you aren't a liberal by 20, you have no heart. If you aren't a conservative by 25, you have no brain.

 

[CitizenKain]

Or maybe you believe feminist values teach women to feel shame, resulting in emotional trauma, so that feminists can get more government funding for their activist organisations. But that is a far more disturbing proposition.

The only person who believes that is you.

 

[UberNeuman]

OP - what is a republican?

 

[boomerang]

So you're saying the majority of people who are rich are rich because they worked their asses off? I'm afraid the statistics completely disagree with you, middle class people (what's left of them) will most probably STAY middle class, rich will STAY rich, and poor people will STAY poor. This rag to riches story through "hard work" is extremely rare and a pipe dream. Rich people know this ofcourse, but they like to give the other classes hope. It takes money to make money, and only the Rich have that money to begin with.

I wish to report Comrade that your brainwashing has been a near complete success. Your comprehension needs some tweaking but with just one more application of the electrodes...

 

[Charles Kozierok]

So you're saying the majority of people who are rich are rich because they worked their asses off? I'm afraid the statistics completely disagree with you, middle class people (what's left of them) will most probably STAY middle class, rich will STAY rich, and poor people will STAY poor. This rag to riches story through "hard work" is extremely rare and a pipe dream. Rich people know this ofcourse, but they like to give the other classes hope. It takes money to make money, and only the Rich have that money to begin with.

Republicans believe strongly in meritocracy. That's why they constantly advocate gutting early childhood and education programs to save money, while fighting tooth and nail against estate taxes. 🙂

 

[Rainsford]

Money isn't equivalent to GPA because we don't talk about how hard we worked for it when we spend it? Seriously?

It's an excellent example. Work hard in school, work hard in your career, make wise decisions, develop job skills in demand - in other words, devote yourself to work - and you'll make good money. Very few people will ever get rich JUST from working hard, but then very few people ever get academic honors JUST from working hard either. Getting rich requires hard work plus intelligence plus perseverance or innovation; becoming valedictorian rich requires hard work plus intelligence plus perseverance. Earning a good salary requires hard work OR an excellent education or scarce job skills; earning a good GPA hard work OR an excellent education. (I say 'OR' because someone from an excellent prep school may sail through easy curricula with a high GPA whereas someone just as intelligent from a failing inner-city high school would have to work her ass off to make the same GPA.)

That you think it's a bad example just shows how much you've adopted the proggie play book that grades are earned but money is distributed. But just as one can inherit great wealth or no wealth, one can have good, conscientious parents who understand your homework and have the money for good private schools and tutors, or one can have parents unable or unwilling to help with your homework, instill a work ethic, or provide you with decent nutrition or clothing that won't draw ridicule, parents unable to afford private school or even an apartment in a neighborhood with decent public schools. Just as grades are the reward for school work, money is the reward for real work.

The world is never fair, but it's massively more unfair in education than in work. One can educate oneself and develop job skills in demand as an adult, at any point in one's life. By contrast, one has very limited ability to affect one's circumstances before entering the workforce. Certainly a child can (and should) self-educate, but a child who has never been properly taught to read, in a failing school with few or no books, in a neighborhood with no public library (or at least no public library safely accessible), is at a huge disadvantage compared to the adult whose has never been taught a work ethic or any useful skills. If nothing else, the adult has the freedom to go elsewhere to find people from whom he can learn these things.

I think you've got the fairness backward...results being driven by effort and ability works much more fairly in education than the work world.

When you're in school, you basically have the same chance of getting good grades as anyone else, limited only by the effort you put in and your innate intelligence. There are a few unbalancing factors like the fact that some fields of study are much harder than others and your early education (over which you have little control) makes a big difference further down the road. But overall, people get basically the grades they should, IMO.

Once you're done with school and into the work place though, it can be noticeably different. Our current system has some pretty disproportionate rewards for certain fields and job roles. Being a great engineer isn't going to make you as much money as an investment banker, ever, unless you also have management and business skills enough to start your own company. Now obviously you could re-train in the "right" field, but we can't ALL be investment bankers, and not just because not everyone has the same interests and abilities. And the differences in reward aren't small either.

For academia to look more like the work world, your GPA would have to be capped depending on what you were studying. Sorry, education majors, you can't get above a 2.0 GPA, ever, no matter how good you do in class. The business majors can get 4.0 GPAs though.

Basically I think "Just as grades are the reward for school work, money is the reward for real work." is wrong, or at least too simple. Money may be the reward for real work, but the amount of money you get is less tied to the amount of work you put in than grades are tied to work, IMO. And that's because grades are ONLY meant to judge work, while money is first and foremost a measure of VALUE to a specific economic system at a specific time and place. Money being a reward for work is a byproduct, with exactly the lack of a direct relationship you'd expect in that situation. A CEO doesn't work hundreds of times harder than his employees, but he gets paid hundreds of times more.

 

[SirStev0]

I have become completely apathetic.
Two choices in the US:
Incompetent Democrats or Malignant Republicans.
Big Giant Douche vs Turd Sandwich

 

[LunarRay]

I have become completely apathetic.
Two choices in the US:
Incompetent Democrats or Malignant Republicans.
Big Giant Douche vs Turd Sandwich

But Vote.... Well, don't vote if you wish to blame some one... Cuz, if you do vote and they get elected it becomes your fault they did nothing or the wrong something... hehehehehe If you don't vote you can blame either side for everything... AND, it ain't your fault...

Now ain't that a comfy chair to argue politics from?
()🙂

 

[Svnla]

I am not too crazy about Republicans, can't stand their obsession about abortion (one of many examples) but I can not stand the idea of "continuing to support" lazy folks for generation after generation after generation from Democrats.

For the poster that compared the CEO's salary vs. a typical worker. It is true that the CEO is not working harder 100x or 100000x times than the employees (in the pure sense of working) but it is his idea and vision/strategy = big salary. See examples of Jobs (Apple), Buffet (Berkshire Hathaway), Gates (MS), et al. Those folks make big money because of them, the companies become more profitable => able to hire more folks => more revenue => more hiring...=> even more profitable...and so on.

Possum - well said in post #225.

 

[5150Joker]

Translation of title, "I think I'm becoming a retard".

 

[nehalem256]

I am not too crazy about Republicans, can't stand their obsession about abortion (one of many examples) but I can not stand the idea of "continuing to support" lazy folks for generation after generation after generation from Democrats.

For the poster that compared the CEO's salary vs. a typical worker. It is true that the CEO is not working harder 100x or 100000x times than the employees (in the pure sense of working) but it is his idea and vision/strategy = big salary. See examples of Jobs (Apple), Buffet (Berkshire Hathaway), Gates (MS), et al. Those folks make big money because of them, the companies become more profitable => able to hire more folks => more revenue => more hiring...=> even more profitable...and so on.

Possum - well said in post #225.

All 3 people you mentioned actually started their company. And in the case of Jobs took a company near bankruptcy to become the most valuable company in the world.

There are also a lot of incompetent CEOs that walk away with millions.

 

[CallMeJoe]

Translation of title, "I think I'm becoming a retard".

Not all Republicans are dimwitted. That's just an act the candidates put on during presidential primaries.


At least, some of them are acting.

 

[blankslate]

Those folks make big money because of them, the companies become more profitable => able to hire more folks => more revenue => more hiring...=> even more profitable...and so on.

Possum - well said in post #225.

There's only one problem with that... in regards to the part I bolded in the excerpt of your post.

Companies aren't always hiring more even if their revenues are up.

In some cases they are squeezing more productivity out of their existing workers without an increase in pay that reflects the increase in worker productivity. After all what are the workers going to do quit? Not always feasible depending on the circumstances.

 

[Paul98]

no joke... im starting to feel like... man.. i've worked hard to have the (few) things i do... maybe people are just pussies... i've always liked the democrats because, the democratic way is to help others... help people who maybe weren't born as smart as i am.. who didnt have the things i did to get where i have.. but maybe.. just maybe.. i did that. maybe others who haven't gotten here dont deserve to live nicely, and to have cars, and money, and, even though i dont have alot of things i would like to.. i will. one day.. maybe i shouldn't want to give to welfare..

fuck i dont know.

So you want to work harder, get less, have those who are in power and have tons of money be given more money and more power. So you don't have to help out those who work in crappy jobs to barely scape by, or need assistance to get back on their feet?

Sounds to me like you have fallen for the republican brainwashing.

 

[First]

😀 Considering the dog's mess you made of my previous paragraphs I'm not surprised.

Let's break this down into couplets:

I can be conscientious at my work, work overtime, eagerly seek out ways to advance myself, and I'll make more money;
I can be conscientious at my education, study long hours, eagerly seek out ways to advance myself, and I'll make better grades.

I can make a very high income because I grew up wealthy, attended excellent preparatory schools, developed a great work ethic, made lots of useful contacts;
I can get a high college GPA by having attended excellent preparatory schools, had well-qualified tutors to help me grasp the parts on which I was shaky, developed great study habits.

I can make a very low income because I grew up wealthy, attended excellent preparatory schools but never valued learning, never developed a great work ethic, made lots of useful contacts but was an asshole to them all;
I can get a low college GPA by having attended excellent preparatory schools but never valued learning, had well-qualified tutors and tortured them, never developed great study habits.

I can make a very high income because I grew up dirt poor, attended shitty and dangerous schools, never knew anyone with a work ethic, but worked very hard to overcome all this and fought to make something of myself;
I can get a high college GPA by having attended shitty and dangerous schools, never knew anyone who valued education, but worked very hard to overcome all this and fought to make something of myself.

I can make a very low income because I grew up dirt poor, attended shitty and dangerous schools, never knew anyone with a work ethic, and I acted just like everyone else I knew - and got the same results;
I can get no college GPA by having attended shitty and dangerous schools, never knew anyone who valued education, and I acted just like everyone else I knew - and got the same results.

It's a lot easier for Mitt Romney coming from money to have a successful career than it is for Orangejello probably-Johnson-although-maybe-that-guy-at-the-rap-concert coming from Cabrini-Green. It's a lot easier for Mitt Romney coming from money to have a high GPA than it is for Orangejello probably-Johnson-although-maybe-that-guy-at-the-rap-concert coming from Cabrini-Green. It is possible for Orangejello to have a high GPA AND a successful career, but it takes a LOT more work than it does for someone with Mitt Romney's background. However, in both cases the money and the grades are the reward for being smart and working hard. As far as GPA being devalued if it's not earned, that's certainly true; it's one of the reasons to oppose Affirmative Action. (Not that I do, there are also reasons to support it.) However - unless and until the person evaluating those GPAs KNOWS that the applicant did not earn the GPA, the two function as much alike as GPA and money can function. But mostly the similarities are in the earning, not in for what they are used. Remember, if they were similar in all things they'd essentially be the same thing.

Boy, you went through an awful lot of explanation to say nothing of consequence in failing to address the practical reality I already quite succinctly explained: The whole purpose of GPA is represent that one has attained a certain level of knowledge and hard work. It does that job well more often than not, and you know this to be true. Money's source, how hard one worked to attain it, is NOT considered in a transaction. Basically never. Get it yet? You understand the magnitude difference between "more often than not" and "basically never"? They're very different.

So yes, rich kids getting tutors does happen, and makes it easier to achieve higher GPA, and poor kids have it tougher because they can't afford those things (and the inverse can sometimes be true, yes). None of which takes away from the above reality which it seems as if you aren't intellectually capable of addressing. I guess "proggies" challenging that cognitive dissonance of yours gets your juices flowing. Too bad nothing substantive comes of it.

Also, if someone knows that you stole money they aren't going to take it because the police can confiscate it and leave them without the goods or services they provided and without the money. Try going into a nice hotel and telling the manager "Hey, I just robbed a bank and I want to spend all this money before I'm caught! Give me your best suite and your finest dinner." You'll see that there IS an expectation that money is earned legally.

I already quite clearly stated that we're assuming money is obtained illegally in this discussion. Since there is no comparable offense in academics given that cheating isn't punishable by law (simply by the institution in question), the question of legality isn't relevant. This is about merit and hard work, not legality. But even if we were to use legality in this discussion, the same applies to cheating in academia, so your point is a wash.

GPA is not necessarily assumed to be earned from hard work either; if I know the average GPA at a particular college is 3.92, I'm unlikely to put much value in YOUR 3.92 GPA because I'll assume you put no special hard work into getting it. In that sense, the two are also as alike as they can be given that GPA is not a direct form of exchange media, but merely a form of reward, whereas money (at least in the form of income) is both a form of reward and an exchange medium. Their similarities shouldn't be that hard to grasp.

No I'm sorry, but GPA is most definitely assumed to be earned from hard work more often than not because that is exactly its purpose. Money's purpose is almost exclusively as a medium of exchange whose source isn't considered in the vast, vast majority of transactions. This is a well known fact no matter how you frame it and I encourage you to poll P&N'ers with a straight-forward question as to what they believe on the matter. I'm sure your world view will be challenged, but reality is reality. Btw, an easy 3.92 (say due to major, engineering vs. dance, or difficulty of school) is something that is well known among employers during interviews and is something many will take into consideration. Meanwhile virtually no merchant in the U.S. economy is going to ask a buyer "Oh but did you earn this by the sweat of your own brow? Because if not I cannot in good conscience take it!". lol

I'm not claiming that money and GPA are the same, as they obviously aren't; I'm merely pointing out that both are customarily earned, with different levels of difficulty for each individual varying on many of the same factors, and therefore can be profitably compared while not confusing them as the same thing. n fact, there's a strong movement among the worst proggies to eliminate grades and GPA altogether because of this difference in difficulty between individuals in achieving those grades and GPA - just like the worst proggies want to eliminate differences in wealth altogether because of the difference in difficulty between individuals in achieving wealth. They see it as unfair that the rich kid with all the advantages earned his 4.0 without breaking a sweat while the poor kid from the projects worked his butt off to earn his 2.0 just as they see it as unfair that the rich kid with all the advantages earns his $200K as a loan officer at the bank without breaking a sweat while the poor kid from the projects works his butt off to earn his $20K as a groundskeeper at the bank.

This is a fact I never challenged which is why I made the following statement so you wouldn't be as terribly confused as you (apparently) are now: The whole purpose of GPA is represent that one has attained a certain level of knowledge and hard work. It does that job well more often than not, and you know this to be true. Money's source, how hard one worked to attain it, is NOT considered in a transaction. Basically never. Get it yet? You understand the magnitude difference between "more often than not" and "basically never"? They're very different. In practical terms, most economic transactions done with U.S. dollars in the U.S. economy are not assumed to have been attained through merit, because it's irrelevant to the person offering the good or service. A business will take your money regardless.

Mostly though I'm just messing with you. I fully realize that you can never admit the slightest possible correlation between income and effort without utterly destroying your belief system. But most people understand that work, exactly like education, lies partly in what you start with but mostly in what you do. Besides, messing with proggies is fun! You guys say the darned things!

Aw that's cute, all that word vomit and you were "just messin mang".

Tip; brevity is the soul of wit.

 

[Ausm]

That sounds more like a coming out party?

 

[Atreus21]

rofl. It's a dumb example that makes no sense; GPA's are meant to represent merit and hard work, that is their sole purpose. Money has no such purpose, it's merely a means of exchange and no one that does business or barters with someone is under the impression that their money must have been attained through hard work. The source of money isn't even usually brought up in the vast majority of transactions in the real world.

So, per usual, your world view doesn't represent verifiable reality.

edit: spelling

How does the bolded have anything to do with whether or not the money was acquired by earning it?

Just because it's not brought up, doesn't mean I didn't earn my money by hard work.

 

[dank69]

How does the bolded have anything to do with whether or not the money was acquired by earning it?

Just because it's not brought up, doesn't mean I didn't earn my money by hard work.

Just because someone has money, doesn't mean they worked hard for it, yet werepossum makes the assumption that money is a measure of hard work.

 

[First]

How does the bolded have anything to do with whether or not the money was acquired by earning it?

Just because it's not brought up, doesn't mean I didn't earn my money by hard work.

No of course I realize that. Ideally, everyone who exchanges money earned it through hard work, relative to the standards of the time of course and in the proper context.

What I'm saying is that no one who barters (i.e. negotiates) or exchanges dollars for goods or services requires that the money was obtained from hard work. That is the opposite of the standard expected of candidates with certain levels of GPA.

For example, I'm sure you'd find it difficult to believe if you heard that someone buying groceries at the local supermarket was asked at the cashier if they earned the money through hard work. I don't know about you, but I'd very it very odd if merchants who accept dollars for their goods/services were routinely contemplating to themselves "Gee, I wonder how hard he worked for his dollars". On the other hand, if someone goes into an interview and writes 4.0 GPA on his resume, the assumption is that that GPA was earned through some level of hard work, and not 2.0 of it given to them by another student as the fantasy example boomerang gave described.