cancel reply
Posting mode: Reply


Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
name e-mail subject pw(deletion)
Post and go
Bump thread?

  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 5120 KB.
  • Javascript must be enabled for all of our addons to work.
  • Come chat and see that we're all a bit crazy on IRC!
  • Do not post any artwork from sexyfur.com and/or
    Jeremy Bernal. This is now a bannable offense.
Flockmod!

File: mqdefault[1].jpg - (10.56 KB, 320x180) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
10817 No.3491239

So who are the Google furries, and what are they talking about?

https://thefederalist.com/2018/01/10/19-insane-tidbits-james-damores-lawsuit-googles-office-environment/

In a section claiming Google tries to “stifle” conservative parenting styles, the suit reads: “Google furnishes a large number of internal mailing lists catering to employees with alternative lifestyles, including furries, polygamy, transgenderism, and plurality, for the purpose of discussing sexual topics. The only lifestyle that seems to not be openly discussed on Google’s internal forums is traditional heterosexual monogamy.”

A footnote next to the word “plurality” adds: “For instance, an employee who sexually identifies as ‘a yellow-scaled wingless dragonkin’ and ‘an expansive ornate building’ presented a talk entitled ‘Living as a Plural Being’ at an internal company event.”

No.3491248
>“We want to be inclusive of people not ideas” one employee identified as Alon Altman wrote in a message included in the lawsuit. Damore says that sentiment was backed up at an Inclusion and Diversity Summit he attended in June, when he was told by Google employees the company does not value “viewpoint diversity,” but actively strives for “demographic diversity.”

This kind of thinking is also what's killing colleges in US as places of intellectual debate and learning. They strive for "diversity" and to turn colleges into safe spaces, where those who want to learn something and succeed are shamed and humiliated by upper class brats trying to score diversity points.

Same can be applied to this situation with Google. God forbid you are a white heterosexual male, any and every opinion or idea you might have is automatically disregarded.

No.3491255
File: Who_Fucking_Cares.png - (203.29 KB, 444x448) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
208165

I'm oddly ok with google giving it's employees lessons on the weirdest people on earth. For any other company this would be strange but Google's target customer base is literally everyone so having the employees know about the fringe is actually a legit business move.

No.3491257
File: Learning the Ropes Fix nc.png - (4609.42 KB, 2877x2202) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
4720047

>>3491248

>God forbid you are a white heterosexual male...

This cry baby logic always amuses me. The most privileged people on earth get pissy because anyone else gets a few minutes of the conversation. It's like people complaining that no one ever talks about how the sky is blue or the grass is green.

This song is for you white guys!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CjjC7B6v8Y

No.3491263

>>3491257

Hey assfuck, not every white male in the world is some rich sexist, racist or transphobic/whatever-phobic bastard with nothing to worry about. Yet you SJWs make it sound like it's always the case, and "straight white male" has become a strawman for you to beat on over and over and over. There are many males out there, white or not, who are equally successful in life or have shit luck. There are males out there who go through shit every day in their lives just to make ends meet, and they are in far greater numbers than these white privileged brats you (rightfully) hate. But for some reason, you focus on these underprivileged males who just want to work like everyone else, and treat them like assholes who have everything handed to them on a silver platter. Thank God I don't live in US because your brand of political correctness has reached absurdly toxic levels.

Yours truly: straight white male from European shithole who spent 10 fucking years barely making ends meet, who was always passed over at several job interviews because he isn't a minority/PoC, but doesn't hold any malice against said minorities and PoC because of the fact.

No.3491265

>>3491257

Yet at the same time you would say it is conspiracy theory that people claim diversity is a codeword for no conservative straight white males.

It's one or the other, you duplicitous fuck.

No.3491270
File: Ea9MDX7.jpg - (147.74 KB, 1024x1024) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
151289

>>3491257 yeah but that whole victim complex mentality is what the left seems to thrive on. So it's a little weird to play the "cry baby logic" card when we since somethings not adding up.

No.3491271

>>3491265

>you duplicitous fuck.

You described 3B perfectly. He keeps flip-flopping between arguments just so he can have something to argue about with people.

Like how he went balls-out in full support of Bernie Sanders during elections, singing fucking praises about him to the skies. Then when Bernie got punted out of the elections, 3B suddenly turned on him, calling him weak, corrupt, etc. Now all of a sudden he is back to supporting him. He must think everyone on this board has some memory loss issues or something.

No.3491274
File: george-carlin-tribute.png - (0.00 KB, 486x251) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

>>3491263

>who was always passed over at several job interviews because he isn't a minority/PoC...

Sure, they got the job because they were a minority and totally not because they were more qualified or had a better interview. I'm sure everyone else is racist except you.

No.3491275

>>3491274

>Sure, they got the job because they were a minority and totally not because they were more qualified or had a better interview

Actually that was pretty much the case. Our town hall where I applied, for example, favored hiring Roma/gypsies based on the fact they're a minority. There were no special requirements needed from them to apply for a job, while everyone else had to be "unemployed for 2 years straight" (which means even working, say, a summer job for a month or two beforehand automatically disqualified you) and to have between 2-5 years of working experience. It was all a ploy by the mayor to net political points. And don't get me started on several other workplaces...

But sure, keep thinking every white person here lives in big shiny mansions and has 5 cars they bought from money they stole from minorities.

No.3491286
File: 1474491664.jamminbison_day34.png - (144.96 KB, 1000x919) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
148444

>>3491239

>furry is a lifestyle

Never liked that meme, never will.

No.3491291
File: let's plot a course.png - (327.61 KB, 843x466) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
335473

>>3491248

That doesn't apply to STEM majors. Nobody in any of my software engineering courses gave a fuck about your gender, only how well you could code. Anyone who cared more about their pronouns instead of their studies got washed out in the intro classes.

No.3491292
File: CBJOZ-sWgAApwIP.jpg - (18.80 KB, 494x370) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
19251
No.3491316

...
And when are we going to talk about new Ducks? (and why its shite)

Cap: wow

No.3491325
File: privilegecartoon.jpeg - (37.94 KB, 500x475) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
38851

>>3491275

>But sure, keep thinking every white person here lives in big shiny mansions and has 5 cars they bought from money they stole from minorities.

You so mad, bra but no one thinks this. You're part of the majority so of course you'll fall into all financial brackets poor and wealthy.

When we say privileged that isn't what we are talking about. The fact you don't get that just shows how out-of-touch you are.

No.3491327

>>3491325

Please, they know exactly what "privileged" means. The "evil SJWs" have been patiently explaining it to them for years, because liberals are too thickheaded to realize that these people aren't really interested in changing their minds about anything.

Because if privilege exists, that means institutional inequality exists, and that means that society is fundamentally broken, and that means that meritocracy is a joke, and that means that every shred of comfortable Capitalist propaganda they've ever believed was nothing more than a cruel lie.

And that's scary. Far more comfortable to believe conspiracy theories, half-baked racialist pseudoscience and forced /pol/ memes.

No.3491328
File: becdfb07439c179b94dea5fcf28c5ce7.jpg - (214.72 KB, 745x570) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
219877

White privilege is a series of assumptions that are pre-baked into our society. When a white man walks into a clothing store people assume he is there to shop. When a black man walks into the same store people assume he is there to shop lift.

You are assumed to be guilty if you are a minority. For example there is a project where donation funded teams of scientists are doing the DNA evidence testing from old cases that never got processed by the cops to see how much the lack of proper testing is putting innocent people in prison. As of their last report, black people represent 13% of the US population, they represent 47% of the 1,900 exonerated prisoners.

The justice system is more than twice as likely to just not bother to process evidence if the defendant is black. They just assume they are guilty of something and don't bother to do a proper investigation.

No.3491329

>>3491328

Speaking of thickheaded liberals.

No.3491331
File: 1437723114880.png - (459.80 KB, 569x613) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
470833

>>3491328

>When a black man walks into the same store people assume he is there to shop lift.

Well, golly, it's almost like black people shoplift so fucking much that they've created and enforced a stereotype that causes shop owners to not trust them. It's... It's almost like shop owners have a reason for not trusting random black people in their stores.

Golly.

Gee wiz.

Gosh.

No.3491332
File: Its_A_Conspiracy.png - (128.14 KB, 426x558) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
131211

>>3491329

Sorry if the facts disturb your white picket fence ideal of America but shit is fucked up and it needs to change.

No.3491333

>>3491328
Niggers are always guilty .

Around blacks never relax.

Nigger

No.3491334

>>3491332

Do you hate niggers or what,?

Take your stance/pick one.

No.3491335
File: DL5_fLuUQAA3g-S.jpg - (67.96 KB, 800x563) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
69595

>>3491331

>Blacks shoplift more so it's their own fault.

A) That's entirely not true.

B) The reason you think that is true is because when white people get caught shop lifting they get a slap on the wrist while black people go to prison. The news reports on how many black people are in prison for shoplifting but never how many white people get out of it consequence free and never see a court room.

C) Security will always catch more black shoplifters because they watch black shoplifters more closely.

"Blacks represented approximately 10 percent of all shoppers at a particular department store but represented approximately 90 percent of all shoppers stopped for suspected shoplifting."

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/jerome-d-williams/barneys-shoplifting-racial-profiling_b_4318452.html

No.3491336

>>3491332

Speaking of thickheaded liberals.

No.3491337

3B goes to the gulag for being a dumbass liberal. >>3491333 >>3491334 goes straight to the wall for being a worthless empty husk masquerading as a human being.

No.3491338

>>3491248

>This kind of thinking is also what's killing colleges in US as places of intellectual debate and learning. They strive for "diversity" and to turn colleges into safe spaces, where those who want to learn something and succeed are shamed and humiliated by upper class brats trying to score diversity points.

Tolerant people are superior to edgy chan-boys like you. Go back to Hogsville and read books meant for you, like the Bible.

No.3491339

>>3491263

>Hey assfuck, not every white male in the world is some rich sexist, racist or transphobic/whatever-phobic bastard with nothing to worry about. Yet you SJWs make it sound like it's always the case

As a White straight male - I hate you more than any presumptive tumblrkin that wants to send me to a gulag.

Death to Damore.

No.3491341

>>3491339

Join the Red team, comrade. We (probably) won't gulag you as long as you continue to hate the fash vermin.

No.3491342

>>3491341

Right-wing people are a bigger threat to me than any group of women/LGBT/non-Whites.

I will never systematically be hurt by non-Whites for being White. I will never be systematically hurt by non-men for being a man. I will not be materially hurt or held back by any non-cis person because I am cis.

I know this because I am not deficient. Because I do not have your disease. You are genuinely afraid of being hurt and vicitmized as a White person because your family, your culture, your media and your childhood gave you a disease.

No.3491349

>>3491325

A very good explanation of privilege:

https://digitalsynopsis.com/inspiration/privileged-kids-on-a-plate-pencilsword-toby-morris/

No.3491352

>>3491335

This also applies a lot during drug crimes.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4899119/

Whites are most likely to get a slap in the wrist or a "warning" for drug offences.
Blacks get frisked and detained more than anyone else for exactly the same.

Blacks unlocking a Bike in a neighbourhood "suspiciously" had almost half the "witnesses" call 911.
In the white side, only one called out of 20 or more.

There are multiple examples of this experiment and study on youtube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge7i60GuNRg

The entire language and indirect things in global media, stores, and products can easily invisibly (as in our subconscious ) program us to be racist in some way that even when you're doing something clearly racist you wont notice it. Because its apparently "normal" in your brain.

From soap boxes having deformed black man faces, to stereotypes on TV like how criminals on TV are presented (if they are black = they are shown their mug shots, if its a white man, they show him with his family all dressed and in a clean environment)

No.3491363
File: Cynder help me out here.png - (76.79 KB, 239x208) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
78629

Can somebody explain to me why ThreeBee derails the thread with the most brain-dead far-FAR-left narrative while posting a picture of futa anthro Fashion Horse fucking her own sister?

No.3491365

>>3491342
As dangerous and batshit delusional as the right are, no. Blacks, especially gang members do beat up whites for being white and small communities of immigrants may very well assault any white who enters their area. It happens probably the same rate as whites beating up minorities.

SJWs can and will target men, harass them, or even cost them their jobs for being men. It's happened before. Remember the scientist they tried to discredit because of his shirt?

Just because one side is guilty as fuck doesn't magically mean the other side isn't also committing war crimes. The US and Russia were honestly not much better than Hitler, and if the US had killed the interned Japanese we'd have been equal. Both sides get their hands dirty in conflict.

No.3491370

>>3491365
Nah to everything.

>SJWs can and will target men, harass them, or even cost them their jobs for being men.

My Y chromosome apparently makes it impossible for me not to create Google Docs about how half of humanity is genetically predisposed to not belong in my workplace?

You are lying. And by that I do not mean you are currently saying lies, I am saying you and the phenomenon called "lying" are synonymous. You are lying, lying is you.

Republicans kill more Whites than blacks do by attacking their healthcare, their workplace protections and food stamps.

Sessions is going after devil-weed rather than opioids.

You are a shithole of a person.

No.3491371
File: 1adzoc.jpg - (88.33 KB, 500x500) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
90455

>>3491365 That was very well said.

No.3491372

>>3491365
It happens probably the same rate as whites beating up minorities.
As a percentage of the aggressor's population? Possibly. As a percentage of the victim's population? Assuredly not, simply due to population discrepancy.

No.3491378

>>3491349
That's stupid because if you're a cis-het-white-male they dump you into the privileged class. Imagine a white trash kid with alcoolic parents, well they won't pay for uni either.

No.3491382

>>3491378

>Imagine a white trash kid with alcoolic parents, well they won't pay for uni either.

And that White kid is not allowed to support racism, transphobia, homophobia in any way, and is not allowed to pretend he would be better off if he was ALSO not white and straight.

Besides, three guesses as to whether the right will do a single fucking thing for him expect exploit his sadness and try to find scapegoats he can aim his pain at so he doesn't blame their war on opportunity, welfare, healthcare and social mobility for his very economic class.

There is no fig leaf. ceteris paribus, your poor example kid is still privileged, albeit not economically.

But continue comparing poor White dudes from Millsclosed, PA with Oprah Winfrey instead of comparing them with poor Black dudes or gay girls in similar areas.

In the same way your kind of commentator usually compares beleaguered incels and neckbeards with women attractive enough to be able to be hypergamous or get sugar-daddies, instead of comparing them with overweight or plain-looking girls, when you're trying to explain how women are more privileged than men.

No.3491384

>>3491370

>how half of humanity is genetically predisposed to not belong in my workplace?

More than half of humanity regardless of gender is already genetically pre-disposed against working in Google (aside for supporting jobs) because they necessarily have some standards about the intelligence of their workforce. According to twin studies, genetics explain about 80% of the differences in individual intelligence, when controlled for physical environmental issues like iodine deficiency, lead exposure, malnutrition etc. which for the most part no longer apply in the first world.

That being the case, and also because there exists an empirically observable difference between male and female IQ distibutions, hiring based on true performance metrics naturally result in a noticeable gender bias.

Furthermore, as people make their education and career choices in their youth, they observe what their likely outcomes will be and place their bets on where they're likely to succeed. After all, they won't know whether they're any good at it before they actually push their limits, but if they choose wrong they'll waste a decade of their life finding out it was the wrong choice. Unless you're clearly in the top percentiles already, it's more rational to pick a career where you're more likely to succeed according to the average characteristics of your group.

This skews the bias even further to the point where women don't choose to enter male dominant fields because they're statistically less likely to thrive there. This is an entirely expected outcome, and trying to fix it by gender quotas is misguided and irrational.

In fact, trying to force more women into places like Google has but one real rationale: increase the pool of applicants to push down wages. The true experts know their worth, but the beancounters don't want the best - they want the cheap. This is being exploited by the incompetent who are leveraging diversity politics to climb up the corporate ladder. That's ultimately going to be the downfall of the business, but in the mean while the social justice crowd gets what they want.

No.3491386

>>3491382

>There is no fig leaf. ceteris paribus, your poor example kid is still privileged, albeit not economically.

Care to explain how? Because all I hear is "if you're white you're privileged by default" but no one wants to explain what this "privilege" entails.

Typical bullshit spouted by Americans who have no idea how people live outside of US.

No.3491388

>>3491257

Do you no the wey?

No.3491420
File: DTVC_e2VQAA4cAg.jpg - (137.36 KB, 1280x905) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
140658

>>3491363

>Can somebody explain to me why ThreeBee derails threads...

... by replying to someone about the topic they are posting about? This is the same logical failing as people here who make threads saying that I always end up being the subject of the conversation.

YOU are making me the subject of the conversation not me. Stop changing the subject, idiot.

No.3491421

>>3491386

>Care to explain how? Because all I hear is "if you're white you're privileged by default" but no one wants to explain what this "privilege" entails.

We've explained several times, in this thread. Just because you don't like the replies doesn't make them untrue.

No.3491422

>>3491421
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trial

No.3491424
File: Batman_Has_Seen_Some_Shit.jpg - (51.80 KB, 576x768) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
53047

>>3491378

>Imagine a white trash kid with alcoolic parents, well they won't pay for uni either.

This is actually a good example of white privilege. You are upset because you EXPECT white kids to get to go to uni and you think minorities are taking that expected outcome away from them.

Your own bias that some white kids are "missing out" because minorities are "taking their place" implies you think it's their place in the first place.

No.3491428

>>3491424

> You are upset because you EXPECT white kids to get to go to uni

You just pulled that out of your ass.

No.3491431

>>3491428

3B has a habit of twisting other people's arguments or making strawmen out ot them. No big surprise.

No.3491438
File: photo_2017-12-11_16-46-35.jpg - (45.38 KB, 544x600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
46473

>>3491424

Well yeah, white people are better.

That's why white people are a minority, yet structured the world with beauty and civilization.

Now not-white people? Look at where they're from. They made those countries shitty.

"White Privilege" should just be "White Man's Burden"

No.3491554
>The only lifestyle that seems to not be openly discussed on Google’s internal forums is traditional heterosexual monogamy.

What exactly is there to discuss?

No.3491593
File: nintchdbpict000293340077.jpg - (106.34 KB, 960x640) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
108889

>>3491257

> Crybaby member of the most privileged class.
No.3491594

>>3491424

Yeah, that kid is privileged and thus should not be given any help.

No.3491595

>>3491428

Oh, so you don't think that minorities are getting special treatment? My bad. I guess I misunderstood your previous posts. It's good that you accept your failure in the job market and education is because others are more qualified not because of some special privilege they get just for being black/brown/whatever.

That is very enlightened of you.

No.3491596

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-_4LhiX8ha0

No.3491600

>>3491595

> more qualified for being black/brown/whatever.

Exactly that's the problem. Skin color counting as qualifications. "Your skills and education are flawless, but we're looking for someone more diverse".

No.3491602

If white people are superior, maybe they should control everything.

No.3491605
File: behind it.gif - (11.17 KB, 501x585) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
11437

>>3491602
They think they are, they feel guilty about it.

>>3491596

No.3491613

>>3491595

>Oh, so you don't think that minorities are getting special treatment? My bad.

You just pulled that out of your ass as well. Check who you reply to.

But thanks for exposing yourself as a moron again.

No.3491622
File: secret_of_life_circle_sketch.jpg - (465.65 KB, 1045x830) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
476822

Remember kids....
ITS ALL YOUR FAULT!

No.3491632

>>3491622

I'm confused, the white guy walking around in circles was born into privilege, so shouldn't he have just taken the first exit on his left?

No.3491646

>>3491632

I'm confused, why haven't SJWs like you been lynched and ser afire like you so richly deserve?

No.3491648

>>3491632

>I'm confused, the white guy walking around in circles was born into privilege

Only by some dumb, reverse racist SJW logic. Following real world logic he is an average Joe trying to find his place in life and facing same difficulties as everyone else.

No.3491650

>>3491648

To assume white man isn't born to privelige isn't racist at all.. But if I say should say all the jews are priveliged....Oohhh.. look out.

No.3491655
File: Mnt.Plotmore_.png - (282.44 KB, 502x446) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
289214

>>3491650

>blah blah blah I refuse to accept that white people have an easier time than everyone else just because they are white.

I don't know why this is a hard concept for you to grasp. White people are the majority and have been since the beginning of the nation. Of course they are going to have advantages others don't. Every majority will take care of itself. You can either accept that white people do have advantages or believe that all white people who have ever held power are selfless, saints that eschewed any advantage they could set up for themselves and their family. It's just not in human nature to be that selfless. It's not evil, it's just nature.

No.3491657

>>3491655 Don't quite see how it is priveliged for me to slave away and pay taxes and have the whole third world marching in getting everything for free.

No.3491659

>>3491655
Oh look, it's this thread again.

No, there is not a secret wypipo's club that grants benefits to members for simply being white. You are cultists and you're pushing for a new Original Sin (the sin of being white).

No.3491660
File: blog-4.jpg - (841.98 KB, 2764x1884) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
862185

>>3491657
You have the privilege of making up for all the racist hate crimes your ancestors committed :3

No.3491661

>>3491660 But they didn't. We've always been occupied and the colony.
So my "privelige" is double injustice.

No.3491662
File: duschraumflossenburg1ikk0.png - (61.32 KB, 630x428) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
62787

>>3491660
We came up with a solution for that and many more problems long ago. A final solution.

No.3491671

>>3491600

Funnily that while many big corporations who have very big views and visibility force diversity.

Theres still racists local jobs that refuse by colour or sexual orientation.

Also, how do you know the other "brown diverse person" hasn't the same high qualifications as you? or has a specific trait that makes them more desirable than you other than claim colour?

No.3491672

>>3491657

>have the whole third world marching in getting everything for free.

That excuse again? Its not like they are suddenly not paying taxes when they join the workforce.
Those lies have been demonstrated as bullshit parroted by Trumpists.

Meanwhile, we live in a corporate wellfare program, where corporate.. who creates LESS JOBS than middle class, get MASSIVE CUTS as payment for "buying (oh pardon I mean lobbying) politicians.

Companies like Boeing, GE and Raytheon who get millions of grants and taxes back despite getting record profits.

No.3491676

They do not join the work force because they have already been booted out. Except not because their countries are shitholes and it's not humane to return the shitholes to their shithole countries.
Thus we priviliged just keep paying for everyone who just shows up and asks.
https://yle.fi/uutiset/osasto/news/helsinki_votes_to_approve_healthcare_for_undocumented_migrants/9955462

No.3491677

And because everything is free for everyone xcept the white man, countries like Sweden are now drowning in islamist shit.

No.3491678

Guess who are currently taking Medicare away from poor, downtrodden White people?

Is it the "SJWs" or is it the other party?

Remember: Antifa are always right about everything.

No.3491716
File: safe_solo_fluttershy_equestria+girls_image+macro_vulgar.jpg - (100.65 KB, 652x540) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
103062

>>3491657

>I'm not privileged, I'm oppressed because a tiny part of my tax dollars goes to help other people.

If it makes you feel any better the group of people who benefit most from government aid programs are white people? Though, honestly I don't think it will because you don't care about skin color as much as you care about this notion that somehow taxation is stealing money from you to give to someone else.

You pay way less in taxes than you get out of the services those taxes pay for. Your entire life time of taxes couldn't pay for the clean water you drink, bath and wash your clothes in.

That's why we pool money together and that is why taxing the wealthy is so important. If you only tax the people who are using more resources than they are paying for, the system collapses.

No.3491719

>>3491716

>Your entire life time of taxes couldn't pay for the clean water you drink, bath and wash your clothes in.

1) Bullshit
2) Water isn't tax funded. You have to pay your water utility for what you use.

If the water actually cost more than the taxes you pay in a lifetime, nobody could afford water.

No.3491728

>>3491719

>Water isn't tax funded.

Potable water is you disingenuous pasty snakecunt.

No.3491731

>>3491728

>Potable water is you disingenuous pasty snakecunt.

And yet you still pay a water bill to the public utility.

The argument that water costs more than the average person pays in taxes is completely ridiculous, because it would imply the economy is using something between 20-40% of the GDP just on drinking water. In reality the cost of the water infrastructure even in dry states like Nevada or California is just around 2% of the state GDP.

You need to be really really really poor to not pay enough taxes to cover your own water use, because even the sales tax you pay any time you buy anything would cover it.

No.3491733

>>3491728
Mind, in places like California, residential customers pay 5x the cost of water, while a handful of large industrial farmers use up 80% of the water and pay 2% of the cost.

It's not tax funded; the state is not sinking any tax money into it - they're making a net profit from it and giving it away to their corporate cronies.

No.3491734
File: rtertwer.png - (64.84 KB, 663x190) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
66394

>>3491731

>Flint water crisis all of 2017...
>Drinking water isn't ran by the government..

I apologize, that was a bad example. It assumed you had some vague idea of just how much infrastructure and maintenance goes into keeping your water flowing or that you had watched the news or read a book or talked to an adult at some point in your life.

I'll try using a more simple example next time I argue with you.
Something with crayons perhaps.

No.3491740

>>3491734

>>Drinking water isn't ran by the government..

Now you shifted the argument again. You didn't make a point about who runs the infrastructure, you said:

>You pay way less in taxes than you get out of the services those taxes pay for.

But you don't pay your water through your taxes, you pay them through your water utility bill! If you're paying less in taxes per year than your water bill, you must be truly poor.

No.3491744

>>3491734
Basically, what you're claiming is that there's such a massive government subsidy on people's water utility bills that it completely eclipses what the average person pays in taxes in total, making their taxation net negative on the point of water alone. For the amount of tax that the typical individual pays, you are then impying that there exists a massive yet apparently invisible government program to the tune of at least 1/5th of the entire economy, centered solely on the public water infrastructure, that is being paid by taxes coming off the rich.

For once, are you going to admit you were talking out of your ass, or would you rather continue this charade for another ten threads?

No.3491745
File: 679867_atryl_der.png - (253.98 KB, 1100x880) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
260073

>>3491743

>Basically, what you're claiming is that there's such a massive government subsidy on people's water utility bills..

Yes, that is what I'm saying. Your water bill is cheap because government maintains the infrastructure and subsidizes the labor needed to keep the water flowing to your local water company.

No.3491748

>>3491745

>Yes, that is what I'm saying. Your water bill is cheap because government maintains the infrastructure and subsidizes the labor needed to keep the water flowing to your local water company.

Well, thanks for confirming you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. For your claim to be true, the government would have to spend ridiculous amounts of money into subsidizing water, but somehow fucking it up completely to the point that nothing is happening.

The reason why the US water infrastructure is crumbling to pieces is exactly that the government isn't putting a dime into it. The public utilities aren't allowed to make enough profit, or the profit is pilfered out of them for other government purposes, to the point that they're unable to do anything but apply tape and bubblegum whenever something breaks. Hence why there's 100 year old pipes bursting everywhere, and up to 20% of the pumped drinkable water is being lost to leaks.

No.3491749

>>3491745

> government maintains the infrastructure and subsidizes the labor

Also bullshit. The public utilities maintain the infrastructure - that's why they exist - with the money they gain from sales, and the government doesn't put any money into the utility. Rather the opposite - the government skims off any profits the utilities make, leaving them without the funds to make necessary repairs.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/flint-lead-water-contamination-money-220391

>Flint’s problems include crumbling infrastructure and a dwindling tax base, which have led the city to rely increasingly on its water and sewer revenue to keep its coffers afloat. The moves have helped drive water rates in Flint to the highest in the country
>Flint’s high water bills don’t just cover the cost of running the aging, failing and over-sized plumbing system. Thanks to a loophole in state law, Flint has for years been raising water and sewer rates and transferring millions of dollars of that money to the city’s general fund.
No.3491751

>>3491745
Also, check out this gem from the same article:

>At one point Washington filed a federal suit, but it was quickly killed. There is no federal right to affordable water, the judge told him.
>“I said, 'You’re kidding,'” Washington recounted. “So I did some research and he was right: There is no right to affordable water.”

The state goverments and cities are actually billing the water utilities for "return of equity" for the amount of tax dollars they've previously spent on public infrastructure, on top of doing shenanigans like "outsourcing" the payments of wages to the city, and then again billing the utility for the "service".

The government(s) are not subsidizing your water, they are using public utilities as an extra revenue stream to raise more taxes indirectly.

No.3491795

>>3491749

And again, you illustrate your total inability to grasp any complex concept. I'll try and break it down into simple steps and help you get there...

First, tell me this: Where do you think the water comes from that you drink?

No.3491796
File: d95.jpg - (188.95 KB, 769x1111) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
193482

>>3491795

Actually, wait, never mind. It's going to be a longer road than I want to walk down to get you to understand this simple concept so how about this. You said the city gets money from your water bill. The city is the government. The government charging you money for a service they render, is taxation. So on top of the actual taxes you pay to keep the EPA and the public water works functioning, the roads and the pipes and the repairs and the guys who have to unclog the system every time some dumbass like you dumps a pot full of chicken grease into the system, you pay taxes every month for your water in the form of a water bill.

Even if you ignore everything else, if your understanding of how the system works is, "I turn it on and it makes water then I pay for it." you are still fucking paying taxes on it you monumental fucking twatnozzle.

Please, go to your doctor and ask them if they can do something about how stupid you are. There is obviously something wrong with your ability to reason.

No.3491807

>>3491796

>The government charging you money for a service they render, is taxation.

Not always. A tax is mandatory and not connected to the benefit you're getting; paying the utility for water is not. You're paying a price, not a tax.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax

>The legal definition and the economical definition of taxes differ in that economists do not regard many transfers to governments as taxes. For example, some transfers to the public sector are comparable to prices. Examples include tuition at public universities and fees for utilities provided by local governments.
>a tax is a non-penal, yet compulsory transfer of resources from the private to the public sector levied on a basis of predetermined criteria and without reference to specific benefit received

Whenever you buy something from the government that is specified in amount and price, such as 100 gallons of water, or 100 kWh of electricity from a public utility, that's not a tax. That's just a regular enterprise that happens to be owned and operated by the government.

You've lost the point you've made ages ago, and you're simply trying to save face by semantics.

No.3491808

>>3491796

> So on top of the actual taxes you pay to keep the EPA and the public water works functioning, the roads and the pipes and the repairs and the guys...

You're also making the completely idiotic assertion that those services that actually are tax funded, such as the EPA or the public roads, are solely for the function of providing you with water.

You're counting every thing in the economy that has something to do with providing water, and loading it up onto the single taxpayer to argue that they can never pay enough tax to cover it, which is like saying that every one of your google searches actually costs so much you could never afford it if the cost wasn't spread over the multitude - but that's missing the point entirely, as nobody would build Google, or the public water works, just for you!

>If you only tax the people who are using more resources than they are paying for, the system collapses.

It is exactly by some people paying LESS than their proportion of the goods/services used, that causes the system to collapse, as such subsidies cause over-use of the resource. It's called tragedy of the commons: when the resource is collectively owned and paid not according to actual use but by some arbitrary tax or levy, the one who uses it the least ends up paying disproportionally, so everybody will try to maximize their use to take their own back and then some. This is exactly why water or electricity isn't paid by tax.

No.3491811
File: your-tax-dollars-pay-to-clean-this-vehicle-please-do-29725998.png - (194.46 KB, 500x736) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
199122

>>3491808

>>3491808
This brings up an interesting paradox. This picture is an example of a sign on a subway train. (ignoring the fact that someone put a trump sticker on it for a second). What is a person supposed to feel upon reading this message? If a person feels they're paying too much in taxes, which I would have to assume most people do, since no candidate has ever won on a platform of raising taxes; wouldn't this sign make them more likely to litter? But if everyone littered, taxes would be raised, so it would make them not want to litter, but then if someone happened to litter, it would make those around them more likely to litter as they feel 'Well since we're paying someone to clean up this area anyways'. I don't think this is tragedy of the commons, so much as tragedy of greedy assholes who would literally gorge themselves at a free buffet just to prevent anyone else from getting any food BECAUSE it's free.

No.3491819

>>3491811

>But if everyone littered, taxes would be raised, so it would make them not want to litter

That's the intention, but thanks to progressive taxation and generous subsidies to certain demographics, those who use the public transportation the most also pay the least. That essentially allows them to litter without care while complaining that the taxes should be raised (for the rich) because the trains are filthy.

So you're technically correct. It's not a tragedy of the commons, as the users and the payers are not the same people. The people who litter on the train aren't trying to "get their share of the investment back" because they've simply made no investment in the first place.

No.3491820

>>3491811

>so much as tragedy of greedy assholes who would literally gorge themselves at a free buffet just to prevent anyone else from getting any food BECAUSE it's free.

It's more accurately called "capitalism of the proletariat". I.e. "eat the rich".

People vote themselves money, in the form of tax breaks, free public services, welfare, mandatory wage raises, public spending on make-work projects etc. because they're the majority and they can, because there's no immediate penalty for demanding and gaining wealth redistribution through the state.

People literally eat their own economy to ruin, and the worse it gets the more redistribution they demand to the point where the government corrupts and collapses under the impossibility of providing the people all the shit for free.

No.3491821

>>3491820

But if we could have a government that ensured under harsh penalties that no-one took more than an equal share of the services, and sent all the greedy fucks to gulags, we would be living in a utopia!

No.3491823
File: See_How_White_I_Am.png - (406.94 KB, 392x459) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
416710

>>3491820

>the government corrupts and collapses under the impossibility of providing the people all the shit for free.

Yet you have zero problem with billionares and the richest corporations in the world getting a free ride from the government? Literally billions every year and the government subsidizing their work force with welfare and food stamps because the company won't pay them enough to bring them out of poverty?

You are perfectly ok with your tax dollars going to help people, as long as those people were born wealthy and don't need it because your argument isn't a logical, moral or ethical argument, you are just repeating what you have been told and clinging to it as if it's gospel truth because you can't stand admitting that you are wrong.

No.3491824

>>3491823

Kamala Harris is consistently attacking Trump for racism as much as Bernie, and if there is one thing Whites do not like, it is calling out racism while being black. You have zero reason to hate her, especially on this matter.

No.3491829
File: Kamala_Harris_Friend_Of_Banks.png - (200.99 KB, 553x772) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
205816

>>3491824

She spent years in California putting and keeping black people in prison. Working to deny them parole and backing policing programs that specifically targeted young, black, men so she could use them as workers in the private prison system.

The only people she cares about are her donors. The rest of us are just chattel to be used in the meat grinder.

No.3491830
File: Kamala-Harris-Fake-Crusader.png - (127.86 KB, 612x263) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
130930

>>3491829

Though my personal favorite Kamala Harris moment was when she prosecuted the "Big 5 banks" after the 2008 financial collapse. Her crowning achievement was getting them to pay 25 Million dollars in settlements after they illegally manipulated the housing market and caused the collapse of the economy. Of course that lasted less than a month then she handed those same banks 29 million dollars in tax money to pay for Mortgages that the banks were owed money on.

She was "hard on those banks" by handing them 4 million in tax funds and letting them escape all consequences for causing a almost global economic crash. Not one single person went to prison. No one was even charged.

No.3491831

>>3491830

> letting them escape all consequences for causing a almost global economic crash. Not one single person went to prison. No one was even charged.

White people would never have allowed Obama to go full socialist like you wanted. They wouldn't have allowed a closing of Gitmo either.

No.3491838
File: DIh26zHXkAEeeXO.jpg - (180.05 KB, 1080x1080) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
184370

>>3491830

Wait, I'm sorry, I made a mistake it wasn't 4 Million dollars she handed out to the banks it was for BILLION dollars in your tax money that she rewarded the banks with after they crashed the economy.

No.3491866

>>3491820

If your company cannot afford to pay a living wage to your workers, you shouldn't have a business in the first place.

A lot of oligarchs do not understand that they cant take all the wealth because the entire system will collapse. They only want more even when they do not even need it.

A living wage is necessary to keep balance of the equation. Allows people from keep buying services and maintain the cycle of money.

If everyone is poor, noone will buy your products. This is exactly why the oligarchs and multicorps are now complaining that "millennials" are killing useless shit companies like Diamonds or non necessities like paper towels and Hooters. Instead of working to fix the issue and maintain the cycle, they only complain about them(millenials) killing their business.

The only way to balance this with keeping greed in check is Taxing.
Thats how the USA maintained a balance and forcing a distribution via services, building infrastructure and military. Now the US is so deep in debt thanks to overexpending and "tax cuts" that they cant even have power to balance. Oligarchs now owns top politics groups and will dictate their way until the US economy crumbles and the oligarchs will flee happily in their private jets after selling their assets to poor moochers (right before the collapse thanks to inside trading).

No.3491877

>>3491866
Jim Sterling genuinely put it best - when it comes to a lot of companies, they don't just want a lot of money, they want ***all*** the money.

No.3491897
File: 3Bs_Modus_Operandi.png - (472.62 KB, 1344x1396) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
483959

>>3491796

>I am DONE! I am NOT participating in this thread ANY! MORE!
>Makes four more posts within twelve hours.

I love when 43B has his shrieking meltdowns and tantrums. I picture him reading other peoples’ posts, getting bug-eyed, then thrashing around while making sputtering “GIB BIB BEEB BIB!” noises like Grandpa Simpson.

No.3491899
File: aerobiz-supersonic-usa.png - (247.00 KB, 475x347) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
252927

>>3491866

I remember when I was a kid, there was a game for the SNES called AeroBiz which was a simplistic airline ceo simulation game.

The major goal of the game was simple, create an airline, gain a certain percentage of market share and certain assets by the time you retire and you win.

At some point after spending hours playing the game, my 7 year old self realized something amazing: If I start out slowly, building up a 'too big to fail' base of assets, then during the last few years take out huge loans I never intend to pay back, dump everything into advertising, cut prices to all my flights, and justify the expense by cutting wages to all my workers, I can successfully stifle any attempt at competition from companies that actually have an incentive to stay afloat. Eventually I got so good at this tactic that I could set up my budget so my market share and assets would skyrocket up until the very day of my retirement, and the very next quarter after taking my fat retirement bonus, the company would go bankrupt.

What I learned from this is simple. All of the so called 'wealth' that companies own is an illusion. It's precisely manipulated and inflated by those in power until it's no longer sustainable.

One of the reasons Millenials are considered lazy and job-hoppers is because there's rarely such thing nowadays as a company that lives and grows with you. Startups are born, and old-guard companies killed off faster than any time in the 20th century. All the meanwhile, the CEOs and other executives are using the company assets as their own personal savings accounts, which they intend to loot before they retire, or anyone votes them out.

Oligarchs are parasites. Companies provide a service. Workers are the means through which that service is provided. The elites of the company rarely even care whether or not a service is being provided, so long as there's something to loot.

Fuck oligarchs.

No.3491906
File: Notetoself.jpg - (99.24 KB, 750x600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
101626

>>3491897

Why do you assume it was me who deleted the thread that I was posting in? Isn't it more likely it was one of the petty, vengeful mods that deleted it?

You didn't even "Call me out on my shit." Read the posts in the image, there was nothing there when the thread was deleted except the original post which I re-posted verbatim.

If I was trying to hide something why would I repost the exact same post word for word that I did before once the thread was deleted?

You act like I'm some evil mastermind out to control every aspect of the board but it's just in your head dude. I'm just some asshole. There are other assholes and some times we are assholes to each other but it's not about you, no one cares about you. No one gives one, single, wet, shit about you or what you think.

We are not conspiring against you, take your medication.

No.3491915
File: Grandpa-Simpson.png - (111.06 KB, 593x640) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
113726

>>3491906

>“GIB BIP IT'S NOT ABOUT YOU, BIB BEEB NO ONE CARES ABOUT YOU! NO ONE GIVES ONE, SINGLE, WET, SHIT ABOUT YOU OR OR BIB–BIB–BE-GIB–BEEB–WHAT YOU THINK!'’

And yet, you responded. Why?

No.3491936

>>3491915

Holy shit, talk about distorting whats written.
He said nothing of that you twat.

No.3491953

>>3491936
Of course not.
His tactic classically has been to delete/repost threads when convenient and attack the credibility of opponents at any available vector.
Here, he cannot delete, so he attacks the credibility of the opponent. Nothing new.

No.3491958

>>3491823

>Yet you have zero problem with billionares and the richest corporations in the world getting a free ride from the government?
>You are perfectly ok with your tax dollars going to help people, as long as those people were born wealthy

Whatabouttism, and strawmen. You're just making irrelevant complaints and pulling bullshit out of your ass again because you lost the topic, so now you're trying to insert opinions onto your opponent to save face.

No.3491959

>>3491866

>If your company cannot afford to pay a living wage to your workers, you shouldn't have a business in the first place.

1) Where did that come from?
2) Define "living wage"

The problem in point 2 is that people tend to up the criteria continuously and never back off from the spoils they've already gained, so we get back to the issue of people voting themselves more and more money. Today's luxuries turn to tomorrow's necessities, and what was "living" yesterday is now seen as impossible torture.

When was the last time you've heard anyone say "I don't need this much for salary"? Or "I want to pay my fair share"? When was the last time you heard anyone below upper middle class campaign for leveling out the tax progression curve?

No.3491960

Besides, leftists are hypocrits anyways. Social justice by redistribution of wealth? Fuck you, you're already in the top 1% of humanity anyways.

So what you actually mean is, "Let's share our wealth equally and fairly, except with those who we arbitrarily don't include. To them we say 'fuck you, got mine'"

No.3491961
File: Go_Fuck_yourself.gif - (292.13 KB, 480x270) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
299141

>>3491959

>When was the last time you've heard anyone say "I don't need this much for salary"? Or "I want to pay my fair share"? When was the last time you heard anyone below upper middle class campaign for leveling out the tax progression curve?

Why would they? We have massive, global income inequality. Literally, 7 people own more than half the population of the planet earth. It's fucked up and you think we should feel bad for demanding to get paid enough to afford to live?

No.3491962
File: Carlin_Peaceful_Protest.png - (232.22 KB, 617x467) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
237798

>>3491960

>Let's share our wealth equally and fairly...

That's bullshit and you know it. No one is saying wealth should be spread out equally to everyone. We are saying it shouldn't be so concentrated at the top that it's a determent to society.

Your arguments are the kind of arguments that comedians make when mocking the wealthy. Your arrogance and greed, your total lack of empathy for anyone but yourself, is clear for the world to see. You are the cancer on society and if shit doesn't get better for the rest of us, we will be coming for the 1%. We won't be using pitchforks either.

When Bernie Sanders tells you that something needs to be done now, before it's too late, he's trying to help you not steal from you because if you keep the current course of action it's going to be a bloodbath and even other wealthy people know it.

https://youtu.be/q2gO4DKVpa8

No.3491963

>>3491961

>Why would they?

That's exactly the point.

If you give the people the right to vote themselves more money, why wouldn't they? That's the tragedy of leftism.

No.3491964

>>3491962

>We are saying it shouldn't be so concentrated at the top that it's a determent to society.

And when you've gained that little bit of social justice, why would you stop? The people can obviously vote to redistribute more and more, and they want more and more, so how do you tell the people "okay, this is enough"?

No.3491965

>>3491962

>Your arrogance and greed, your total lack of empathy for anyone but yourself, is clear for the world to see. You are the cancer on society and if shit doesn't get better for the rest of us, we will be coming for the 1%. We won't be using pitchforks either.

You're exhibiting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_projection_fallacy

>The mind projection fallacy is a logical fallacy first described by physicist and Bayesian philosopher E.T. Jaynes. It occurs when someone thinks that the way they see the world reflects the way the world really is, going as far as assuming the real existence of imagined objects.[1] That is, someone's subjective judgments are "projected" to be inherent properties of an object, rather than being related to personal perception. One consequence is that others may be assumed to share the same perception, or that they are irrational or misinformed if they do not.

Aka. "autistic fallacy".

No.3491966
File: lead_960.jpg - (119.70 KB, 960x655) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
122572

>>3491964
Translation:
If I have to pay for starving children to have food what's next? Clothes? Education? Healthcare?

You know when you post, the words you use are the words of a complete sociopath, right?

No.3491967

Also:

>It's fucked up and you think we should feel bad for demanding to get paid enough to afford to live?

It's one thing to demand, and another thing to take by force. Demands are part of the social negotiation going on all the time. You pay me this much and I work that much - that's normal. If you don't pay enough, I won't work - because I can't work like that. I'll go find something else to do, live in the woods and hunt squirrels if I have to. Then you can try to have your business and your economy without workers or customers, as nobody has the money to pay you anyhow. If work doesn't pay, don't work there! Do something else! Go somewhere else!

Instead, what leftism does is drop the bargaining entirely, refuse to find any gainful work to do, and instead simply grab wealth out of those who have it, by the power of the majority mob, by some arbitrary standard of a "living wage" that is really just an excuse to commit wealth redistribution as no such thing can be defined. One man's living wage is another man's poverty.

It's got nothing to do with justice, social or otherwise, but about simple greed masquerading as altruism. It's doing "good" (pleasing the voting public by distributing money) so you yourself can eat off the cart on the way. That's why leftism is properly called "capitalism of the proletariat".

No.3491969

>>3491966

>Translation: If I have to pay for starving children to have food what's next? Clothes? Education? Healthcare?

Holy hyperbole and hypocrisy, Batman! If you make that argument, don't you think even the poorest of the poor here should be giving their money to people in Africa who are even poorer than they? Why not? Where do you set the standards for forcing people to help other people?

>You know when you post, the words you use are the words of a complete sociopath, right?

You're doing mind projection again. One doesn't need to be heartless to be logical.

On the contrary, the people who claim to be, and think of themselves as being good and on the good cause, are the real monsters, because what they're doing is the same greed as everybody else, and the lies they tell are first to themselves and then to all others. They're simply veiled in the righteousness of their self-defined altruism: "I am fighting for a good cause, therefore I can do bad and irrational things that just so happen to benefit me."

No.3491970
File: la-na-tt-republicans-ignore-poor-20150430-001.jpg - (132.78 KB, 1300x731) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
135967

In >>3491963 you argue that people will never stop trying to vote themselves more wealth and power...

>If you give the people the right to vote themselves more money, why wouldn't they? That's the tragedy of leftism.

Then in >>3491967 you say forcing the 1% to stop stealing all the wealth and power for themselves is wrong.

>It's one thing to demand, and another thing to take by force.

So, again, we loop back to your fundamental truth: Greed and cruelty is great as long as you are the one inflicting it but it is never ok if even the slightest inconvenience is done to you in order to help anyone less fortunate.

You reveal yourself time and time again to be human trash and you can't even see how horrible and repulsive it makes you to the rest of us.

No.3491971
File: george-carlin-tribute.png - (158.89 KB, 486x251) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
162705

>>3491969

>On the contrary, the people who claim to be, and think of themselves as being good and on the good cause, are the real monsters...

Said every psychopath who gunned down a school or blew up a federal building.
Said every villain in every story ever written.
Said every dictator who rose to power on fear and hate.

You are literally making the arguments that we attribute to the caricatures of the worst aspects of humanity.

No.3491972

>>3491970

>Then in >>3491967 you say forcing the 1% to stop stealing all the wealth and power for themselves is wrong.

Nope. You just pulled that out of your ass and misunderstood the whole argument.

More specifically: you're not forcing the rich to stop stealing, but simply instituting a redistribution system that is based on stealing the money back. That is simply creating a social convention where it is permissible to steal so long as you've got political power. If you want to be morally consistent, you can't just play Robin Hood. The ends don't justify the means.

>So, again, we loop back to your fundamental truth: Greed and cruelty is great as long as you are the one inflicting it but it is never ok if even the slightest inconvenience is done to you in order to help anyone less fortunate.

Again you're projecting. Greed and cruelty are not "great" - the point is that they exist, and the greatest liar is the one who says they aren't greedy and cruel.

The point is that by stopping the pretension and admitting directly what you want, we can come to fair agreements. By pretending that one person is good and another is bad, the "good" person is trying to gain more moral currency over the "bad", to gain some edge in the negotiation and stack the game in their own favor, thus gaining unfair advantage by their bullshit.

>You reveal yourself time and time again to be human trash and you can't even see how horrible and repulsive it makes you to the rest of us.

That's a great example of exactly what I'm talking about: you're trying to discredit the argument by calling me bad names. In the same way, the leftist is creating the class divisions to make devils and angels out of people, to justify why they can simply steal wealth out of those who have it.

No.3491973

>>3491971

>You are literally making the arguments that we attribute to the caricatures of the worst aspects of humanity.

But does that make the argument wrong?

You put these arguments in the mouths of evil caricatures and claim that only evil people would say so, but that happens to be a fallacy of argumentation. (association fallacy)

No.3491974

>>3491972

>That is simply creating a social convention where it is permissible to steal so long as you've got political power.

As apposed to what we have now that you adamantly support? Ok, what would your solution be to fix the income inequality then? If paying workers enough to live on is a bridge too far, what is your solution.

Please, enlighten us.

No.3491975
File: sherlock-cumberbatch.jpg - (33.86 KB, 600x418) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
34670

>>3491973

You just admitted to agreeing with the worst scum humanity has ever seen. I don't think calling you human trash is an insult, it's just a factual description.

No.3491976

>>3491971
Also, do you know who really made the argument?

Confuscius.

>the goody-goodies are the thieves of virtue, meaning that to try to be wholly righteous is to go beyond humanity and to be something that isn't human.

That's because "the good" justifies any atrocity to reach it. For example, wars fought for stealing land and property are less cruel than wars fought for ideals, because they stop short of destroying what they seek and back off when they meet sufficient resistance, making peace and diplomacy possible. In contrast, the war fought for some higher ideal will not stop until the opposition is competely wiped out, by any means. Any battle for the good is going to be a total war, because the victory condition is so ill defined it cannot be met.

So if you're justifying your politics as "fairness", you're likely to be a monster yourself as you have to hide your greed behind such terms. You can keep on shifting the goalposts for "fair" indefinitely, always demanding more and more even beyond equality. If instead you admit you simply want more money, that's fine, that we can work out.

No.3491977

>>3491974

>As apposed to what we have now that you adamantly support? Ok

More projection of opinions doesn't make you right. (strawman fallacy). I never said I support the 1% - that's entirely your imagination.

>You just admitted to agreeing with the worst scum humanity has ever seen.

That's such a lame bait that I shouldn't even be replying. Do you agree that vegetables are good? Good, then you're agreeing with Hitler. Your complaint is entirely irrelevant.

No.3491978

>>3491974

> Ok, what would your solution be to fix the income inequality then?

What do you mean by "fix"?

>If paying workers enough to live on is a bridge too far, what is your solution.

You're begging the question. What is your definition of "enough to live on" and why should we agree to that?

No.3491979

If you take money from the rich to help create a first-world nation that can remain stable and powerful enough in the post-war world to create a golden age, then invariably you will end up with the poor taking all the money and becoming lazy, like what happened in the US!

What actually happened: They had to change the rules so the fair-minded, humane, worker-protecting social democrat couldn't get re-elected anymore, and then either assassinated popular left-wing politicians or worked against American interests (Paris peace talks, Iran hostage situation) to sabotage them so they could assault the New Deal that built the US into a powerhouse.

No.3491980

>>3491979

>They had to change the rules so the fair-minded, humane, worker-protecting social democrat couldn't get re-elected anymore

No such thing was necessary. As the government spending grew (now 43% of GDP), too much of the economy became dependent on the government spending and so politicians who would reduce spending became un-voteable, while politicians who would spend more became popular - this was the people voting themselves money. Meanwhile, no politician who would raise taxes out of the poor or the working classes could get elected.

The end result was steeper tax progression and more spending, and when the government couldn't tax any more they started borrowing money endlessly, which ran up the inflation. Simultaneously, the rich reacted to their high taxation by investments in lobbying, and as all governments do corrupt eventually, they managed to lower their own tax rates - and the government started running faster and faster into debt for the lack of money to pay their social spending.

This debt though was invisible to the public, and it seemed like all the tax they were already paying was enough to pay for everything, so they kept on demanding more and voting for politicians who would borrow and spend on them. The new money created by debt then went first to the banks, and from there mostly to the 1% to increase the income disparity and create the problems we are facing today.

In short, the huge income disparity in the US today was inevitable, because the government took on the role of the do-goodie, "fixing" the economy and "helping" the people by means of wealth redistribution. Their means ended up the opposite of their intention. Now the left is proposing to "fix" the situation by doing even more of the same, and accusing anyone who would disagree as being evil.

No.3491981

>>3491980
American workers are more productive while getting a stagnant share of the pie, while the Dow are seeing record profits that go to record levels of foreign shareholders and overseas fund placement rather than investment or better wages. That is the opposite of what all right-wing economic doctrine and moral philosophy consider fair, appropriate or sustainable.

No "socialism", no post-war economic boom for the US. It didn't take grit, moral character or self-sustaining, it took public works and public expenses.

No.3491982
File: tumblr_nd8kylGH1X1ts2oqko1_500.jpg - (59.73 KB, 499x400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
61167

>>3491976

Again, you are showing your bias. You think the poor forcing the wealthy to give them more of the reward for the productivity that the poor do most of the work to achieve is stealing but you think the wealthy buying the government and placing the poor in a position where they have no choice but to work for starvation wages is completely justifiable.

In your mind, the wealthy can do no wrong and anything the poor do other than obedience, is a sin.

No.3491993

>>3491982

> the productivity that the poor do most of the work to achieve

Approximately 80% of the US economy is "services" - retail and trade, administration, etc. - which are for the most part not productive but simply middlemanship and pointless bureaucracy. The entire problem is that the poor are trying to work in occupations that for the most part do not generate wealth, but simply consume it, and expect to be paid a "living wage".

This has become a problem because people want easy desk jobs with high salaries, rather than digging ditches or whatever, so they flock to the cities in search of "opportunities" and find themselves working at McDonalds' for petty wages, and if they disagree to the conditions, goodbye, there's ten others just like them waiting in line.

Finding themselves in such a situation, the people then have two options: bite the bullet and move elsewhere in search of better alternatives, or start whining to the government to provide more welfare, higher minimum wages, whatever. While some do option A, others do option B, and the government responds by raising the minimum wages, raising welfare, pouring money into the economy to "create jobs", and it becomes easier to stay there doing essentially nothing, so more people switch to option B: vote yourself more money.

>You think the poor forcing the wealthy...

Actually, I think the political elite is abusing the situation of the poor to gain more power, by promising to "fix" the situation in exchange for votes. It's the political elite who like to tax and spend, because they're sitting in the middle of all that money flowing around. They've invented themselves a job where you don't actually have to do anything, because finding actual solutions to problems would make you redundant. From the government bureaucrat's point of view, having lots of poorly paid or unemployed people around is a boon - it's job security - as long as you can pass the blame to someone else and pretend you're doing something about it.

This is again completely natural - the government could not do anything else because the moment the government defines itself as a "problem solver" and tasks itself to "fix" the society, it immediately sets itself on the path of corruption. The moment the government is let loose to "do good", it starts to do bad.

No.3491994

>>3491981

>American workers are more productive while getting a stagnant share of the pie

That's because "productivity" is measured in terms of GDP, not real goods or resources. It measures how much money the american worker is moving around - how much they're earning their employers - not how much actual wealth they are producing. The actual industry has gone down steadily since the 70's while the financial side of the economy has grown massively.

As the government keeps pumping more and more money into the economy, more and more of the economy is concentrating on shuffling that money around and hoovering it up to the 1% bank accounts, and all those stocks and financial instruments count as "productivity", just as well as some poor sod serving you coffee counts as "productivity" even though that labor input to the system is a net negative in terms of real value.

Everybody's trying to maximize their income and minimize their effort, which is why people opt for non-value jobs that are close by and don't require them to train in special skills or move out of the cities from all the fun services and distractions, creating long lines of applicants for every position and consequently, low wages.

No.3491998

In general we can say, the government, the 1%, if not one and the same, are both abusing the stupidity of the masses to create this situation of massive wealth disparity.

And that statement instantly reveals the other side of the coin: it's also the fault of the people for being stupid, greedy, and short sighted of their own situation. You can't fix the issue from one side only, because one side creates the other - indeed all your attempts will be circumvented by the same pig-headedness of the masses and some other form of corruption takes place.

The government can't fix it, because the government instantly becomes part of the problem. The only thing you can do is take your hands off. Unfortunately, there are always people who won't believe this, and will try to "fix" things by force, and make things worse until the situation becomes unbearable.

Shit needs to hit the fan before the people become wise. Until then, they will blame the rich, blame the free market, the "capitalist" that they themselves have created, for all the problems and keep undermining the basis of their own livelyhood.

No.3491999

>>3491982

>In your mind, the wealthy can do no wrong and anything the poor do other than obedience, is a sin.

I already told you to stop projecting. You're like a god damn multiplex movie theater.

No.3492001

>>3491981

>No "socialism", no post-war economic boom for the US. It didn't take grit, moral character or self-sustaining, it took public works and public expenses.

Or more realistically, it took selling tons and tons of stuff to the recovering European economies. "Made in China" wasn't a thing yet, and everything west of the Urals was bombed to shit.

So the US got to sell all the industrial goods for decades, plus all the weapons exports to NATO countries, and the cold war expansion, then the petrodollars... and as a result we got money left over for goverments to buy popularity with public works - but it wasn't those public works that built the society - it was the money and wealth flowing in from overseas.

Now the money is flowing out, and the government is left with the burden of their commitments that they cannot pay for, and a society of people that believes it doesn't need to manufacture or produce anything to make ends meet - just whine for more handouts.

No.3492011

>>3491982

The wealthy are not the reason you cannot eat. Pride and entitlement is the reason you cannot eat.

Even illegal Mexican migrants will work the fields and pick the fruit, but you? You entitled middle class trust fund baby? You'd rather spout Marxism about the worker's virtue while having the hands of a baby.

You deserve helicopter rides.

No.3492040
File: photo_2018-01-08_15-35-30.jpg - (37.57 KB, 720x693) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
38476

>>3491982

Fact: Poor, useless people contribute nothing to society. They take, take, take, then want more, getting jealous whenever they see someone with something they want.

Fact: "Rich people", people that made their money, contributed a lot, pay other people for goods and services and know the value of money.

Fact: "Rich socialists" usually get their money handed to them by a mommy or daddy, and do not know the value of money. They are the young leftists who think just because they got their money for free, they believe everyone should just be "given free money"

It really is this simple.

No.3492041

>>3492011

>Even illegal Mexican migrants will work the fields and pick the fruit...

Go out and try getting one of those jobs. They literally will not hire you because they can pay illegals under the table while you cost them tax money, insurance money, and workman's comp if you get hurt. As long as corporations are free to exploit the most desperate of humanity they will, they have to, it's how corporations work. It's a race to the bottom. They will get away with everything they can.

No.3492042

>>3492040

>Poor, useless people contribute nothing to society.

Your emotional issues with poor people are showing. I don't know if your brother stole your ice-cream as a child or why you have this obsession with everyone trying to "take" things from you but have you considered just how these "moochers" live? Do think they want to live like that? Do you think that if given a chance most of them wouldn't get out of poverty in a heartbeat? They aren't there because they want to be, because they are lazy, because it's a nice comfortable life, they are there because the economy is fucking them over and they have no choice.

No.3492056

Lotteries, inheritance and royalties are not "earning" money, those are freebie handouts and most rich people are rich because of such things.

No.3492063
File: the gaem.jpg - (21.51 KB, 600x308) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
22027

>>3492056

The rich fixed the game. That's why they're rich

You have lost the gmae

No.3492071

>>3492056

>>Lotteries, inheritance and royalties are not "earning" money, those are freebie handouts and most rich people are rich because of such things.

Lottery, every party consented to the exchange of money. Royalties? Same thing.

Inheritance? Not free. It comes at the expense of the other family members AND it is a consensual donation upon death.

The government is not handing out it's own money, or the pay of congress and senators, it is handing out tax which is forcibly seized from the efforts of others. Likewise, tax breaks are not handouts, because they merely are telling someone you promise to rob them of less.

You can't compare those things to social programs. Well, you can, but you'd be an idiot or ignorant of context.

No.3492103

>>3491962

>That's bullshit and you know it. No one is saying wealth should be spread out equally to everyone. We are saying it shouldn't be so concentrated at the top that it's a determent to society.

Specially when these dudes can literally control entire countries with their web of money and corruption.
All to modify change and even make laws on purpose to make themselves more powerful and rich.

These people are a disease because they can never be satisfied. They reached a level of Midas.

No.3492104

>>3491964

< The people can obviously vote to redistribute more and more, and they want more and more, so how do you tell the people "okay, this is enough"?

As I have said a few times. The rich are already redistributing money for their own benefit while blaming the "poor" and "socialists".
Very ironic.

The rich pay technically LESS TAXES thanks to using loopholes they can only buy, they use tax heavens, they literally buy politicians and they push for giving as little as possible to workers.

Theres a ton of companies owned by millonaires which are still getting tax breaks and kickbacks that they never needed.

No.3492105

>>3491972

>More specifically: you're not forcing the rich to stop stealing, but simply instituting a redistribution system that is based on stealing the money back. That is simply creating a social convention where it is permissible to steal so long as you've got political power. If you want to be morally consistent, you can't just play Robin Hood. The ends don't justify the means.

History has demonstrated that no rich, no wealthy and no powerful who are addicted to their position, will give ANYTHING BACK. NOONE.

Every single dictator or king were either voted out of power by the majority, or eliminated in a mayor bloody conflict.

"Stealing" money back is pretty much balancing an equation of constant abuse by oligarchs.

What part you do not get about this?

The rich and the powerful are always trying to convince idiotic smochers like you, that you somehow will be rich if you protect the rich interests (hint you will NEVER be rich). They pay huge amounts of PR and bullshit excuses so you protect THEIR wealth so you have the "near zero" opportunity to have some crumbs left.

We're going to reach an Elysium like world where a tiny rich portion will live in the happy lands in extreme ways as the world crumbles because of the greed of certain groups.

No.3492106

>>3491982

Fucking this.

Besides again and again, the wealthy are all about "cost cuts" and leaving billions work free for the sake of numbers in Wall Street.
The wealthy should never be a paramount of stability nor should be entrusted to maintain the economy because they literally do not give a fuck. The mayority of them do not care about the stability of Any country as long they can get away with their wealth and power.

They also refuse to play fair in the rules, giving them a disproportionate easyness to maintain their status quo by cheating and never touching jail. They can now bankrupt entire megacorps based on frauds by enriching a certain tiny group with insider trading and leaving millions in the dust.

Pop and Mom and middle class business were the staple of balance and organic growth based on supply and demand.
The megacorps changed this status quo by purchasing all the levels of production to amass many "too big to fail" business that destroy all other ones that required these levels of production to maintain themselves. And they can no longer have a startup to grow unless you receive huge loans as startup.

That is why a fair government should balance the equation. If you pull too much on one side, you will get another french revolution and heads will roll. And this is one of the reasons the rich and oligarchs are so busy pushing for big brother. For population control and the same way why Foxnews and CNN love to divide a country. A divided country cannot get together to fight the real enemy of the people.
Infact, I bet right now some rich men are laughing loudly about how these loser Trumpists think Trump and similar persons will benefit the loser's position (hint, nothing) while they reposition themselves in their seats of power.

No.3492107

>>3492040

Facts you conveniently missed:

There are POOR people who are WORKING even up to 3 works all by themselves.. either family, debts, medical and even school tied them to poverty.

The Rich do not always "produce" there are many who are just leeching from wall street by products and playing roulette. Depending on Wars that were never needed in the first place to maintain their position while trying their best to pay less and less and less taxes (less constributions, parasitism ).


Delete Post []
Password