/lit/ - Literature

Nigger

>>16702444
basado

>>16702444
Checked.

>>16702429
can't be refuted

>you did poorly in school so now you and your descendants should be confined to a cycle of poverty and disenfranchisement punishing your offspring
i'm sure we can do better, mr sowell

>>16702429
Who wants to make things equal?

They actually don't as for one example they on average have roughly the same time on earth and regardless it still doesn't justify unbridled profiteering in civil society.

I'm delighted to see Sowell threads on /lit/ after years of thinking I was alone in appreciating his works.

Continue to make the trannies seethe, friend.

>>16702429
>Tiger Woods
He doesn’t work for a living. He’s radically overpaid for playing a game.
Stop fucking pushing this moron

>>16702519
>what is your political aim?
>to make the opposite side seethe
very nice

>>16702429
Obviously you can hand out "rewards" totally arbitrarily. It's totally possible if it's desirable or not. I don't think lotteries or gambling is necessarily good but they exist. If you're claiming some tight correlation between performance and outcomes always exists or matters that's on a case to case basis and you can't generalize. Maybe just by making everyone real bad at sports and everyone just stops you could end up making everything else better. Who knows.

>>16702521
Why do you have Black men, tranny?

>>16702474
sowell dabs on universities and intellectuals

seethe more "smart" people

>>16702532
hate*

>>16702474
your post doesn't address his claim

>>16702521
He spends more time and effort on golf in a year than you will spend on anything productive in your life.

The better critique is to wonder whether out society should inventivize him to spend his life and our money in that why. we certainly can't take away natural interest, but what else could these efforts be directed towards?

>>16702429
Nice sounding words but it doesn't seem to occur to Mr. Sowell that the rules of the game are bad for the nation. Does Bezos really deserve $200 billion? Even if he really were that much better than everyone else at making money, should the game really reward him with that much power when millions can't even afford housing?

>>16702521
Athletes are more important than low IQ bitch fuck factory proletariat losers.

>>16702429
Don't bother. Leftoids haven't had a sound argument against him since the 70s.

>>16702566
>Does Bezos really deserve $200 billion?
Yes
>Even if he really were that much better than everyone else at making money, should the game really reward him with that much power when millions can't even afford housing?
Yes

>>16702588
I give you two easy questions and you somehow manage to get them both wrong.

>>16702555
>anything productive
I have wasted many years at my job and they pay me for this “productivity”. Just because they underpay and I undervalue it doesn’t make Woods more productive or deserving of the millions he gets. There’s no excuse.
>>16702579
Entertainment is all he is. I could have made some excellent films, but I was from poverty and never got a break. His break was paved by his father driving him to this career. There’s no excuse for the income disparities

>>16702429
now picture a mediocre golfer who gets paid as much as tiger woods and is also in charge of what all the other golfers get paid

>>16702624
>I could have made some excellent films, but I was from poverty and never got a break.
And there it is, the jealousy that drive people into the arms of madness (socialism).

>>16702555
his post does address his claim you retard

>>16702588
>Do i deserve to pound your wife to an eye rolling orgasm while you watch?
Yes

>>16702429
These analogies only obfuscate discussion. Talk policy.

>>16702680
>madness
Realizing that money holds you in a cage is not madness, it’s waking up from a madness.
You absolute fool

>>16702771
This point is true but you are filled with jealousy for Athletes. Billions know tiger woods. Nobody knows you. He entertains millions you don't. If you hope entertainers to make less money, you have to be happy with someone else to take all of it while working much more less than tiger woods.

>>16702521
>He doesn’t work for a living.
Super ironic
It's like Raaain on your wedding day
It's a free riiiiiiiide when you've already paid
It's goood advice that you just didn't take
and who would have thought
it figures

>>16702429
Sowell is a total pseud. There's a reason no one in economics today takes him seriously. Just another Shapiro tier grifter, telling the masses what they want to hear. Glancing at this sad excuse for a discussion, it seems like some from that group have made it /lit/. No real argument other than bootlicking and accusing anyone making even the smallest criticism of this obviously illogical system of being 'lazy' or 'jealous'. Get a real argument.

>>16702566
Your assumption seems to be that people not having housing and Bezos having $200 billion in wealth are connected. They aren't. If you're interested in creating a welfare state that houses all like the nordic countries, they actually have more billionaires per capita.

>>16702889
Man, with 650k a week I'd do some incredible shit. Wealth is wasted on the rich

>>16702981
>people not having housing and Bezos having $200 billion in wealth are connected. They aren't.
Are you retarded

>>16702889
>filled with jealousy
Naw. They’re an example. Woods was brought up the in the OP. I wanted to be an entertainer too, so there’s some camaraderie there.
In a functional world they’d still do what they love and not live in any impoverished way, just not live like spoiled kings.

>>16703015
They earn it. The system is fucked but they earn their pay. These are world class entertainers. I've watched him play for 15 years. He deserves this amount of money because he actually brings in a large revenue to the club. We stay up all night watching football, if he has that much influence over the game hw surely deserves all he gets.
This doesn't justify everyone else suffering but you don't have this much power over millions of people.you don't provide anything nearly as valuable.

>>16703033
You sound like an incel when they cry about onlyfans. Someone is leveraging what they love for a paycheck. Luckily they hit jackpot. Messi was lacking the growth hormones, so he played well enough that a team i in Barcelona flew him and his family from Rosario Argentina to play football at 14 and get treatment. He got lucky

>>16702521
Athletes are more important than university professors and pseudo-intellectuals like Richard Wolff.

If Pindar were alive today, he would write odes for people like Tiger Woods (who is correctly paid), not for losers.

>>16702429
Thomas Sowell is based and wrong about nothing other than perhaps climate change
and even then he isn't wrong about the culture in academia surrounding it

>>16702429
>we need feudalism because some people are genetically predisposed to be landlords
It's the same line of thinking that created hereditary incest royalty bloodlines, it's just a bunch of nonsense to justify the haves and punish the have nots

>>16703033
>tripfag is a faggot
Imagine my surprise

>>16702566
He does. It's thanks to Bezos that I own many of my books.

I have nothing to thank the government for, so I'd rather give money to Bezos, to be quite frank. Not joking. If I had the option of, instead of paying taxes so that the government may "give" me the "services" that I "need", using all of my tax money to buy products exclusively from Amazon in order to get myself what I know I want, I would do it without hesitation. I'd be glad to see Bezos becoming a trillionaire as long as he allowed me to keep buying books and useful utensils from Amazon for cheaper prices and with better customer service.

>>16702566
This is the person Nietzsche was referring to when he talked about resentment and slave morality

>>16702624
>Just because they underpay

No, they overpaid you. Truth is that they probably wanted to fire you but felt too much pity.

>I could have made some excellent films

I am sure you could, Butterfly, I am sure you could.

>His break was paved by his father driving him to this career.

Nonsense argument. He is the best. Case closed.
Also, you can just substitute "Tiger Woods" for almost any Latin-American or African soccer players, the vast majority of whom usually come from backgrounds which are much poorer than yours.

>Entertainment is all he is

Entertainment is what makes life worth living.
Even literature is entertainment, although of a higher form.

>>16703187
>Paychecks are sacred and accurate accounts of value
You sound like a moron.

>>16703240
You suck and people like you are why this world sucks. But I accurately blame the system that rotted your brain in the first place. Yw.

>>16702974
No one in economics takes you seriously either.

>>16703326
>they overpaid you
Don’t pretend to know what you’re talking about. We all know you don’t.

>>16703015
Messi does more than you could ever do.
You may think you have a "special talent", but you don't.

>>16702531
Gambling and lotteries are essentially random chance. Even taking into consideration how they're manipulated by the government or whomever runs them. A bit different from golf, business/work, or anything else that takes skill and effort

>>16703348
>Messi does more than you could ever do.
Not that anon, but you don’t know that and it’s self-defeating in ways you don’t understand to say so.

>>16702521
He is a skilled player. He provides entertainment. It is his livelihood. While I agree he's overpaid, why shouldn't he be adequately paid for doing his job?

>>16703348
>If you’re unlucky enough to be born poor, you deserve to poor health and early death
>Try entertaining me next time, suckers
But I’m sick of “wealth” redistribution schemes and just want the game to end

>>16703334
>You suck and people like you are why this world sucks

Nice argument, loser.

>>16703342
I know your posts and that is enough. You can't possibly be underpaid.

You will never make a good film. You never could. You don't have the persistence.

>>16703373
>>If you’re unlucky enough to be born poor, you deserve to poor health and early death

Social mobility exists. Only it doesn't exist for talentless filmmakers. Sorry. You chose a winner-takes-all domain, but you are a loser. You should have pursued something else instead.

>>16703029
Are you? I just explained that countries with the most generous welfare states also have a higher number of billionaires per capita than the U.S.

>>16703367
The social setup I have in mind would “pay” him just as handsomely

>>16703380
You don’t understand how capitalism works. Owners don’t ever overpay. They tally that shit up and if they can’t keep you on as an underpaid drone, they liquidate the place and skip out with the lions share

>>16703397
Hey baby, it’s a doggy dog world
You aren’t from /lit/

>>16703156
>They earn it.
No one is disputing this. You also earn your entire paycheck but still have to pay taxes on it.

>>16703407
Workers feed off managerial surplus labor. Without the firm and all the work that went into organizing it, a worker wouldn't be able to be as productive and would make less money. That's why he chooses to work for the firm, after all, to maximize his income. Therefore the extra money he makes by working for his employer is money he was graciously bestowed by men who, honestly, are treating him too well. In a just world wages would be even lower and dividends would be higher, but what can you do when employers are just too benevolent?

>>16703415
I post here a few times every week (though mostly in poetry-related threads) and have discussed with you, and refuted you, on many subjects, including Noam Chomsky, Brazilian politics, and fascism.

Employers overpay people who dont deserve a minimum wage, which includes failed filmmakers.

>>16702974
>telling the masses what they want to hear
People want to be told they are equal to their actual superiors.

>>16703310
No I'm not. My critique of neoliberalism is entirely Nietzschean. If you think Nietzsche would approve of Bezos you've completely misread him.

>>16703633
A guy who isn't happy enough making it to the top so that he now literally reaches for the heavens? You don't think Neetch would see greatness there?

>>16702981
Of course they're connected. There is only so much money circulating at any given moment. No one person should be able to earn 200 billion. Obviously we need incentive structures to reward those who do good work but no one deserves 200 billion no matter how great their work.

>>16703648
>No one person should be able to earn 200 billion.
Ok then, what is the maximum amount one person should be able to earn?

>>16703648
>There is only so much money circulating at any given moment.
1. Increasing the supply of money doesn't lower housing costs. Because ground rent basically sucks up inflation it only makes housing costs higher. Taxing land value, harberger taxation or replace indefinite ownership with land leases - these things would prevent this sort of unproductive speculation.

2. The amount of money circulating isn't in anyway constrained by anyone's net worth since net worth isn't literal money. It's an appraisal of what someone owns would sell for. Things like Amazon stocks are actually more valuable because some people own them or are in charge of them - Bezzos' leadership is one reason investors trusted Amazon so much to invest in it in the first place. Taxing Amazon stocks or forcing Bezzos to dump those wouldn't free up money for everyone else, it would just tank the value of the stock and the mutual funds that hold those (including hundreds of millions' of peoples' savings).

>>16703415
Ha! Meant to greentext that top part.

>>16703447
>managerial surplus labor
AHAHAHAHAHHAHA. He thinks managers work hahahahah

>>16703498
Wow. I even explained it and you still don’t understand capitalism. The second the workers aren’t making the place cash, it’s shut down quick.
>refuted
Never happened.

>>16703749
Shareholders obviously only pay admnis, execs and managers so much because they love them so much and not because those employees add more value.

>>16703790
The workers are the only ones who make the value!

https://youtu.be/YMdIgGOYKhs

>>16702429
Yes? Why should we equalize? What is this nigger trying to convey?

>>16703801
As long as you have dogma you don't need arguments, I understand.

>>16703820
Are you for real?
Can’t you reason this out? Watch the damn video

>>16702521
>>16702624
>>16702771
>>16703033
>>16703334
>>16703342
>>16703373
>>16703407
>>16703415
>>16703749
>>16703801
Absolutely hilarious how much you hate Black men

>>16703833
Still a dumb joke.
Your uncle Tom is the one that hates black men.

>>16703842
>I-I-i-i don’t hate Black men, I just hate uncle toms
Legit retarded

>>16703749
Workers aren't underpaid, they are correctly paid. The business owner invested his money on the business, and it's his business, so he has a right to make a profit.

>refuted

It did happen. I even outed you as a typical ignorant American who had never heard of Pirandello and Marinetti.

And you wanted to be a filmmaker...

>>16702474
>aka im an incompetent retard who needs gibs and constant handholding to be a productive member of society

>>16703842
>Sowell
>not a legitimate intellectual, just an uncle Tom

Then why did you remain quietly absent from the thread in which Vaush's video, which you had recommended, was thoroughly refuted?

>>16703846
>Why yes, I voted for Barrack Obama. How could you tell?

>>16703847
>his money
Hahhahah. And I love the goal post moving
>I outted you for not reading someone you admitted to not reading.

A good filmmaker need not know who dead fascists were.

>>16703862
0/10
The only video of the guy I ever watched and he refuted the idiot talking point and I ended the thread. Go on, find it. I was left with the last word. Sowell was just dazzling his smooth brained tory prep schoolers with some BS

>>16702429
Equality of opportunity is not equality of outcome. He just gives good takes on bad topics. Not hard to do.

>>16702624
i have no idea why you post here. it doesn't seem like you read at all and everyone hates you. habit i guess? i don't expect an answer, no doubt you've been asked this many times before

>>16703878
I just finished a book on Winckelmann
Before that Olivia, wonderful little romantic memoir of a school girl, very yuri.
Moomins and the Great Flood.
My Lesbian Experience with Loneliness.
And a book on unions.

Not too many threads on them, but I mention them when I can
What’ve you been reading?

>>16703870
>>16703842
Calling black people uncle Toms because you don't agree with their opinion is the ultimate ironic leftist cope. It's inherently racist to think that a black person has to agree with the larger social group, or they are not "black" enough.
You are the worst poster on this board you tranny please please leave, but I know your fucking schizo vampiric mind feeds off of everyone else's hate. plz go

i stinky smelly

>>16703904
No no, I only call uncle toms uncle tom.

>>16703904
this post is cope. politics is not lifestylism. libertarianism, conservatism, fascism, and all rightist politics are anti-black among other things (anti-worker, anti-woman, anti-lgbt, pro-bourgeois, and so on). uncle toms are real.

>>16703914
pseud tranny cope EVERYBODY WANTS YOU TO LEAVE

>>16703870
>his money

Yes.

>Marinetti
>Pirandello
>dead fascists

American education is a disgrace, and monolinguism a disease.
I am the opposite of a fascist, but I can't imagine reducing Marinetti, and specially Pirandello (perhaps the most important 20th century playwright), to the designation of "dead fascists". It is a level of cultural ignorance that I cannot comprehend.
And I didn't out you as not having read them. I outed you as not knowing who they were.
Still, you wish us to believe that you could have been a good filmmaker. You couldn't.

>Go on, find it. I was left with the last word. Sowell was just dazzling his smooth brained tory prep schoolers with some BS

You didn't even show up on the thread. The last time I saw it had reached bump limit and you hadn't shown up.

>>16703944
>>his money
>Yes.
No
>the rest
Oh, okay.

>>16703510
But how do you measure superiority?

>>16703955
Okay, indeed.

You call Sowell an uncle Tom without ever having read a single book of his, recommend a Vaush video "refuting" Sowell's ideas, and when an anon (who reads books) writes a 27-part essay criticizing Vaush, you quietly hide and pretend you didn't see his thread.

>>/lit/thread/S16642534

My mute inglorious Malick, you are making a fool of yourself.

>>16703348
How do you feel that he earns half a million a week and doesn't even think about giving you a cent while you suck his dick online? I support large paychecks just to see people like you. Your fantasies about making it are just as pathetic as fantasies of overthrowing the system. If you aren't doing it for fun........ what are you doing?

>>16703801
>>16703830
The first minute ties into >>16703790. If the admnis, execs and managers didn't add value thant they cost the company/shareholders, they wouldn't be employed (for long, anyway). Execs don't decide unilaterally what shareholders are paid, that is retarded. Shareholders can vote out the direction of the companies they own. They don't need dividends anyway, because they can still make money by selling out their stocks which can appreciate as long as there is a possibility of future purchases (buybacks) or dividends. The managers and clerks have to convince the owners they are worth their pay by adding value/cutting costs more effectivelly than people who could replace them.

The don't pay for the raw materials or tools behind your product either, nor did you assemble the system that allocated the necessary goods to the necessary servicement, nor did you trade the product yourself for something more useful to you (the money - car makers don't get paid in car parts). People who made that possible wouldn't have done it if they didn't expect sufficient compensation. The materials and tools are paid in advance by the company, whose clerks, managers, execs and admnis assemble the allocation system, and then the product is put out in the market by the salesmen - and without these people the product wouldn't have been done because the workers aren't looking for the immediate product of their labor but cash they can trade for the stuff they actually want (that is called liquidity preference).

>"you can teach this to people!"
Except the capitalists' taxes pay for Marxist courses in capitalist countries. Plus, capitalists make money by selling marxist literature and protecting marxist authors' IPs for a cut of those marxists' profits. Paid for the students who put down their money for the mandatory reading on those marxist courses. It's a pretty cool racket, gotta say.

>>16704020
>The don't pay for the raw materials or tools behind your product either,
*You don't pay

I was going with "workers don't pay..." but I shifted to second person midway to feel and forgot to correct.

>>16704008
Interesting thread, thank you.

>>16702566
What's the game that's "rewarding" him with the money? Dude earned his money with a combination of ability and luck, there wasn't anyone handing him money except customers and investors.

>>16704018
How does it feel actually caring to know how much Messi makes and then whining about it online?

I frankly don't care how much Messi makes. He can make as much as he wants. I myself have contributed to his fortune in the past, and would do it again very gladly.
You assume that I have a resentful and envious personality; however, even though as a human those feelings as not unknown to me, I generally care very little, if at all, about other people's economic success.
A politician who makes one million dollars per decade by stealing money from the taxpayer annoys me more than a football player who makes one million a week by signing contracts and selling shirts to people who consent to buy them.

>Your fantasies about making it are just as pathetic as fantasies of overthrowing the system

I don't particularly wish to be a billionaire, but I have no problem with people who do. My ambitions are literary and I am on my way to fulfilling them. As for money, I'd be glad with a quiet middle class life.

>>16702771
>Realizing that money holds you in a cage is not madness
Reach out your arms and grasp that thing, that cage that holds you. Now ask yourself who built it. Be honest with yourself.

>>16704070
>My ambitions are literary and I am on my way to fulfilling them.
Good luck.

>>16704070
I see, that's okay. Would you have a problem with me indulging in the human emotions, if I said for example, that I actually enjoyed whining about it online - but I won't say why I enjoy it.

>>16703359
Well it's not "random" since odds exists. It's a spectrum. Lotteries are just an extreme example. People are ok with distributing some stuff like that. Obviously you could determine all income like that even if most people probably wouldn't like it. Skill/effort doesn't generally translate into automatically being "rewarded", other institutional factors usually get in the way and nepotism is probably in most areas more important factor in the short run which is all that really matters to you personally. The biggest issue with a market society is everyone ends up believing they deserve what they own in a sense no one would be stupid enough to believe in a preliterate society who understood magic.

>>16703279
None of the infrastructure would exist for Amazon to even exist without the federal American government. No dollars or internet.

>>16704070
And if you want to be normative you could make a case football is more dangerous than politics.

>>16704138
>you could make a case football is more dangerous than politics.

The state of /lit/.

Great Sowell discussion lads. Took a lot away from it.

>>16704151
I'm not saying it's so but football can dramatically reduce the lifespan of millions through concussions while its consumption could be lowering national aggregate IQs in many, many ways... only politics can prevent that

>>16702429
This Uncle Tom deserves to be hanged along with any other coloreds who aren't democrats.

>>16704111
Cucks

>>16702519

Based Sowell-brother

>>16702566
>Does Bezos really deserve $200 billion?

"Deserve" is an amazing choice of word here. The guy crushed it and only a soul-leeching loser would wander in and ask if he "deserves it."

>>16702429
Fuck the system. My aunt opened up a beauty salon a decade ago and now has five plus chain stores...she has the audacity of hiring me at $20/hr when IM A COLLEGE GRADUATE...I'm literally shaking rn...Biden needs to win so those greedy fucks finally share like I literally can't

>>16704322
Lol that's some funny bait

>>16702429
why is it necessary to award people? why dont we try and create a system where the highest number of people can be doing what they want to do? if we are mostly doing what we want to be doing, then there is no need to reward people. they can be equally provided for without being penalized or rewarded - the performance can be an end in itself.

>>16702521

>>16704349
We need people to do colonoscopies and clean sewers.

The reason there are paying jobs is because there most activities people want/need someone to do aren't activities people want to do.

As for why we're not mostly artists, even though producing art is enjoyable, is that most people aren't that good at art and strangers wouldn't want to work for the sake of supporting art they wouldn't enjoy themselves.

>>16704171
Politics causes literal wars and genocides, and your statements about football lowering IQ and human lifespan is ridiculous.

>>16704111
>>16704220
Let me amend that.

*Male cucks.

What's all this talk about a "game" anyways? The vast majority of people are participating in voluntary transactions daily, and only government interactions are non-voluntary (taxes, regulations, etc.), but somehow it's government force from self-interested politicians that's gonna "fix"things like inequality or whatever. It's like nobody who critiques Sowell even reads or listens to what he says. It's all vagueries and missing the point.

Good morning i hate women

Wow, the butterfly is an unironic racist. Imagine my surprise.

>>16703416
messi is also taxed. Ask a Spaniard how much there country is hard on football players

>>16704322
kek

>>16702429
Sowell loves describing a world in which everybody starts from zero and economic success is proportional to talent which is nice or whatever but does not actually exist in reality

>>16702429
Stop right now with your halfhearted propaganda attempt. Nobody except for someone who is too far gone would buy any of this gibberish.

>>16702429
based black man

>>16702521
wow, what a good point. Sowell's argument was completely reliant on the notion that Golfing was a legitimate career. he certainly wasn't using it as a random example to illustrate his point. you've done it again, butterfly! You've debunked Thomas Sowell! In fact, I'm so impressed by your immense rhetorical power that I'm going to start reading Max Stirner right now, so that I too may one day become as enlightened and worldly as yourself.

>>16705380
Okay, liberal

>>16705436
you're an old woman, how did you manage to stay this dumb for this long? Just make a good argument ONE time. is that too much to ask? I mean i'd get not taking /lit/ seriously if you had something else going on in your life, but you don't and you most likely never will. you strike me as the kind of person who gets one the news because they were found dead in their apartment months after death, half-eaten by their pet cat because they had no one in their life who bothered to check in on them. the kind of person whose death is only discovered when the neighbours notice a smell, and whose passing is only notable because it puts their apartment up for rent again.

>>16702555
his point is that shit circumstances can prevent someone who has the requisite innate ability to excel from succeeding


faggot

Overly simplistic argument. I agree that talented individuals shouldn't be prevented from cashing in on their gifts but it's beyond stupid to think that there's always a 1:1 correlation between attainment and potential to attain; extenuating circumstances such as those often faced by poor people can absolutely prevent a talented individual from reaching their potential. So to answer sowells frankly really fucking dumb question yes, by creating safety nets that prevent people (and people's children) from being forced into situations that keep them from reaching their potential we can absolutely "equalize upwards."
>>16702981
that stat is a pretty effective rebuttal of sowells ideas, nordic countries are as you said welfare states and yet they have a higher proportion of high achievers than the US. How would that be possible if the mere existence of safety nets dragged down the exceptional?

>>16703801
Unironically, please read Sowell's Basic Economics. I think you'll find it quite interesting.

>>16702613
bezos made a company that generates alot of money, you imply that bezos shouldnt be entitled to the money that he generates from his own works? wtf are you on about you commie

>>16702429
>Well, /lit/?
Sowell assumes a persons wealth is the right due for their efforts. In fact, all success belongs to God, and so no one deserves their wealth. That is why the only just way to use excess wealth is to support the less fortunate. Those who claim they have no problem with the rich because they aren't jealous or something are mistaken. This issue is not that someone has extreme and unnecessary wealth. The issue is they refuse to use it for the intended purpose, the support of others. If someone were to make a billion dollars a day, but properly gave their excess to the needy, it would be of no concern. It is the inherent greed in accumulating such vast amounts of excess wealth, often at the expense of the poor and weak (and Amazon's labor practices are one such example of outright abuse), that is the cause for moral outrage and condemnation.

>>16705476
Women are not good at analyzing, so you can't be surprised.

>>16703498
you never refuted butters, anon, you just ad hominem her and play a juvenile gotcha game, but your arguments are weak (at best).

>>16704758
Are you sure? You don’t sound so, responding to yourself and all...

>>16703854
it's okay to ask for help Anon

>>16702624
YOU SHITPOST ON 4CHAN 12 HOURS A DAY. NO WONDER THEYRE UNDERPAYING YOU YOU DUNCE. YOU COULD HAVE WRITTEN A MOVIE BUT YOU SPEND ALL OF YOUR FREE TIME TRYING TO PEDDLE YOUR DUMB INTERNET PERSONALITY ON THIS DUMB FORUM.

YOU COULD HAVE MADE FILMS BUT YOU DIDNT BECAUSE YOU ARE FUCKING LAZY

ADMIT IT, YOU ARW A LAZY FUCK WHO WANTS TO SEETHE IN YOUR ARM CHAIR WHILE THE REST OF THE WORLD GOES OUT AND GETS IT

YOU ARE FUCKING LAZY

>they dont deserve their millions

SEETHE YOU CUNT

>>16702624
AND THERE IS AN EXCUSE, ITS THE FUCKING EXCUSES YOU GIVE YOUR SELF EVERY DAY WHEN YOU DO NOTHING

YOU DO NOTHING

YOU ARE LAZY

GO WRITE A MOVIE IF YOU REALLY WANT TO

BUT HEY, OR GIVE YOURSELF AN EXCUSE RESPOND MY POST YOU LAZY FUCK

>>16704648
You seem to just be claiming as if it wasn't questionable all wars (or even genocides) are a bad thing... but perhaps there exists some market determined optimum level of self-inflicted mental retardation like you seem to be implying which we should embrace.

>>16703854
society is a spook

>>16702566
>Yes
>Yes

Imo the golf example doesn't hold up when the objective measures of success like in golf don't exist in the normal workplace. Our system is oriented in a way that rewards incitement of consumerism over an agreed set of values. Proportionately rewarding employees in the same departments of the same workplaces is a lot easier than proportionate rewards across the entirety of society, resulting in "low-skilled" jobs which are integral to society (nurse, waste disposal etc.) paying so poorly that people would rather just go and work for some corporation helping fulfill an unnecessary consumerist need in the population just so they themselves can afford a more comfortable life. Despite the fact these jobs are arguably more performant than perhaps the vast majority of white-collar jobs (you won't notice if the ad-team of your favourite product strikes, but you will notice your local waste disposal strike), our society isn't oriented to reward them in that way

>>16702474
there is no cope around this you retard, if you are failing in school you are double digit IQ nigger

>>16703801
>workers are the only ones who add value
Suppose some worker works at a shoe making factory.
If he didn't work at the factory but instead made his own shoes, he'd be far less productive. That means he'd have to sell the shoes at a higher price in order to pay himself the kind of income he earns in wages.
So yes, some people smarter than monkeys may be required to work the assembly line, but the people who set up the assembly line are far more important to output.

>>16707224
two separate issues there
1) low skilled jobs may be essential but anyone can do them hence they pay poorly, supply is too high
2)there are parasitical white collar jobs that shouldn't exist, that are basically criminal

>>16707363
So you admit only workers produce the value.
And that their work deserves the least reward because their are big important thieves that “own” things that they stole. Got it.

>>16707385
>So you admit only workers produce the value
Nope. Without the firm that organized everything, each worker would produce maybe a shoe a week on their own instead of 100 shoes an hour. The firm does far more to add value to the world than the prole who just follows instructions.
>thieves
Nope. They own the firm. The workers agreed to use the owner's capital because they could make more money using it as a wage worker than they could on their own.

>>16707403
So not only is he the skilled labor, he’s also the smartest, not only ecologically but he’d creat full employment!
Damn.

>Nope. Thieves deserve our respect for their initiative
Shoot your teeth out please

>>16705380
Whenever someone equates performance in sports to performance in the world, you know the person is a complete idiot. Sowell is a complete idiot.

>>16707236
What a stupid take
I was in a gifted program in high school, quite a few of my high iq peers did poorly/outright failed due to their shit home lives

>>16707438
>So not only is he the skilled labor, he’s also the smartest, not only ecologically but he’d creat full employment!
I don't remember saying all that. But his firm would be far more environmentally friendly than a centrally planned version of his factory that somehow managed his level of output. And it's still nonetheless true that workers require his organization in order to be as productive as they are. That much is obvious. Else they wouldn't work for him.
>Shoot your teeth out please
No thank you. Anyway, it's funny that you think thievery is such a bad thing when you question the legitimacy of property in the first place. You do realize people must first own things before it can be "stolen," right?

I actually believe socialists make capitalism stronger because they come off so resentful that you just want to counter them and tell them their idiots. I don’t think so many people would be defending capitalism here if socialists had a good reputation for their personalities. Not really a new take but socialists are neo-Christians so of course people are going to react badly to them, it’s funny that their efforts produce the exact results that they want, they create more capitalists and strengthen the already capitalists hatred for socialism. But maybe the socialist doesn’t care that this is true? Maybe she just wants to have a story for her life, and to be able to tell herself that she is fighting for good in a world that opposes her

>>16703359
Gambling cards is very consistent. You may occasionally lose big but there are 10s of thousands who make a career put of playing poker

>>16702429
It's a consequence of living in an alienated multicultural society. If you don't have any bonds to the people around you, why should they stand in they way of your consooming?

>>16707385
STOP POSTING AND WRITE YOUR MOVIE YOU LAZY FUCK

Economic savant reporting in. Sowells assumptions are entirely concerned with a Ceteris Parabus system at market equilibrium. Meaning, they’re irrelevant to real markets, since asymmetrical force and information distorts said market. In a market equilibrium, there’d be no Jeff bezos with 200 trillion shekels; because he wouldn’t be able to abuse contract law, and speculators wouldn’t have the excess monies to speculate on his operations since banks lending practices would be reeled in, and accurat information would negate most speculations regardless.

Sowells entire career is a negrified, unoriginal imitation of Milton Friedman. His points are all true in an equilibrium market. We have not, and probably never will have an equilibrium market, hence the premises upon which the conclusions of his arguments rest are not aligned with our market system, making his entire body of work useful only in the abstract.

>>16707519
maybe capitalism isn't very good, and socialism also is not very good. both are fundamentally based on the same faggoty humanist principles, and the inherent faults in those are why nothing attempting to enact them will work well.

>>16707537
Everything you said was accurate, so most people will either ignore you or misunderstand and become irrationally defensive

>>16707546
Are there any viable, less gay alternatives to them?

>>16707537
Based

>>16707385
Butterfly I have an honest question (assuming this is the real you), I don't have any problem with tripfags but isn't it annoying to know that whenever you appear in a thread you will be shit on, whether deserved or undeserved? People would probably be much more likely to enter a real discussion if you were anon, instead of the usual namecalling you get. People decided to hate you on here and at that point I'd have stopped using my trip.

>>16707546
well maybe the truth is trying to replace one logical system with another logical system is not the answer to our problems and all political revolutions are efforts in futility.

>>16706275

You are underage. Speculation, noob

why is this butterfly nigger in every thread with some shit to say

>>16707607
because she’s obsessed with politics and she believes it’s her purpose in life to arouse political consciousness in fellow humans. or what most people have been doing since way back when

>>16707519
This is a major justification J.S. Mill makes for free speech in On Liberty. People don't truly believe in an idea when they're just told the reasons why they're good. They have to defend it against alternatives to truly see why it's the idea worth the most merit for them to believe in the idea as a living doctrine, not something merely apathetically held onto as a societal prejudice.
Let us give a cheers to our socialist "comrades." We couldn't make up these kind of arguments if we even tried. It's a useful exercise for the burgeoning capitalists of the world.

>>16702429
>>16702474
>implying your ancestors determine your own fate
My grandpa was a farmer and was the first person in my family to go to college. He didn't leave much of a nest egg because he had seven children. My dad was raised by someone who insisted college was critical, and family wealth is finally starting to build. I'll probably go to grad school due to the opportunities afforded to me by my father and my kids will likely surpass me.
If children didn't surpass their parents ever, civilization wouldn't progress. It'd be eternal stagnation. Side note: that one anon's NEET theory of culture is definitely correct, and so I will fund my midlife crisis artistic endeavors with generational wealth while managing it carefully for later generations.

>>16706364
yeah true

>>16707660
Anon you literally just outlined how the actions of your ancestors determined your fate

>>16702519
Sowell is quite based

>>16707632
but she sucks at it. she never even tries to make compelling arguments. she strikes me as someone who has already decided that they aren't going to change their view anymore, but also subconsciously knows that they are not smart enough to convince others through rhetoric. therefore, she engages in empty shit-flinging to make herself feel better.

>>16707685
didn't determine my fate
my grandpa rebelled against poverty

Don't hate Sowell, but I hate Sowell threads.
Get niggers off the board!

>>16703398
And yet you say there’s no connection? No, you are retarded.

>>16702429
"communism makes everyone equal in ragamuffinhood."
--Paraphrased, Max Stirner, Ego aio

With genetic engineering and/or eugenics we can (and should) equalize upward.

>>16707887
Yes, there's no connection. I'm sorry you're too stupid to understand that more billionaires in a given system means Bezos would still be very wealthy in it and you would still be seething despite everyone being housed.
You don't love the poor. You hate the rich.

>>16707809
Yes and if he hadn’t rebelled your life would likely be very different
So his actions determined your fate

>>16707809
You’re dumb as fuck.

>>16708049
>>16708094
fatisnt' rkeal

>>16702429
This would be meaningful if there was on average a massive difference in performance that charted alongside success. But all research indicates this is not true. (https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.07068))
So this just sounds like the nonsense view that Vonnegut made a satire of in Harrison Bergeron.

This also ignores that much 'talent' is only available with great amounts of support. Monetary support often.
Einstein isn't going to come from a sweatshop of course.

>>16702429
>Cuck
>Seethe
>cope
>ahahah libtards btfo
>Why yes i did get most of my insults from my porn-addiction how could you tell?
>Why yes i have never had a job how could you tell?
>Why yes i am a virgin living with my parents how could you tell
>Why yes i had a MGTOW phase how could you tell

Just go and have sex for once you fucking faggots.

>>16708506
The "discrepancy" in the paper is due to very poor operative definitions.

IQ, or general inteligence, is a good proxy for talent, but not strictly better than personality factors like counscientiousness and time-preference, both very related to finnancial success, or domain-specific knowledge.

Wealth as the only measure of "success" presumes that everyone is using their talents to accrue more wealth which might be partly true to an extent to most people but obviously false. Being recognized by your peers, proving something to yourself, or learning something interesting are rewards people might apply their time and energy to pursuing but don't necessarilly translate into satisfying other peoples' needs and wants and thus it's only to be expected they won't fetch that much monetary compensation. Some geniuses are going to be playing chess instead of curing diseases or doing something with more entertainment value to the masses, and that's OK, but it shouldn't be society's duty to secure those peoples' personal passions at cost to somebody else.

>>16708660
If we assume that personal talent, in the way of IQ, leads to success over luck or other factors, then we'd also have to deduce that the greatest achievers in any particular area are those with the most smarts.
So it wouldn't matter if a number of high IQ people prioritize other factors than wealth, we'd still see a correlation between IQ and monetary success that outpaces luck. Which is not something that is existent.

>>16702429
He’s arguing against an ideology so fringe that it’s basically a strawman. Being able to afford health care or having a cent place to live shouldn’t be rewards we only dull out to successful people. Some people will perfume much worse than others for a myriad reasons but still deserve to live in dignity and with basic rights and needs met.

Biological and sociological determinism is justice... in a brutal Darwinian game. I yearn for the times when we finally begin to care about each other and animals. One can wait.

>>16708660
>>16708701
Any area outside of sports or other athletics mind you.

>>16708747
the VP on the Democratic ticket officially endorsed "equity", as in "equality of outcomes". He might've been arguing against a fringe strawman when he made the video, but it's far from fringe now.

>>16708826
>equity = equality of outcome
Not really? Technically speaking, a flat tax is equity, not equality. It takes into account the means someone has when deciding the absolute amount the person will be taxed. True equality would be everyone getting taxed the exact same amount, like maybe 10k per person, if that's what's required to generate the right revenue on average. Equity just means having some level of consideration for individual circumstances. Democrats may be for more equity along the equity-equality spectrum but the overton window doesn't contain the furthest equality position.

>>16708853
In US political discourse "equity" is taken to mean "equality of outcome", "equality" is taken to mean "equality of opportunity/before the law". Actually-existing examples of "equity-based policy' means things like shutting down gifted programs as school because victim groups are under-represented in them, or abolishing standardized tests for the same reason.

>>16704636
okay so why not reward people for the shitty jobs and otherwise just provide a basic standard of living where people can do what they want to do. if you want more for yourself, shovel some shit in the sewers for 5 years then live like an aristocrat. if you don't want to, you get a basic standard of living and can pursue what you want to pursue.

>>16708701
I already argued IQ shouldn't be equated with talent. Talent is a nebulous concept that should be broken down into more precise factors. Even talking about talent as an intrinsic property rather a property relative to an external goal is kind of silly: being better than a non-retarded person at Raven's matrixes or the WAIS battery of tests doesn't strongly correlate with the ability to survive hostile environments which you'd think is the ground-level for inteligence/talent-as-a-universal-metric-if-there-is-one since that is what brains evolved for in the first place. Yet, the foragers making it on the jungle and deserts score atrociously. That is a set of cases where domain-specific knowledge and the right mindset (personality factores) comes through. In industrial society, the need for specialization runs even deeper and general aptitude tests don't pick up on that.

Simply being patient, diligent or the right kind of eccentric makes a huge difference in long-term finnancial success, and those are smarts that don't translate 1:1 to IQ.

The paper is still interesting, and makes good points on activelly seeking meritous people, but that isn't here or there and I won't pretend I'm giving it a 100% fair shake because I'm not that focused.* Turning back to the OP, the paper doesn't make the case for equalizing downward. Having more talent scouting is something I'd be down for, really.

*I will say one thing that stuck with me strongly besides the unidimensionality of the simulated subjects: The opportunity allocation mechanism not being itself subjected to the pressures of capital makes it pretty un-market-like or even un-academy-like if we assume academic prestige works like capital. If there were multiple opportunity allocaters (talent-scouts, employers) and these were subjected to economic constraints, the ones who rewarded talent more often would tend to profit more than the ones that rewarded mediocrity more often, simply because of how often they'd take a share of the gain or incur a loss leaving some opportunity givers to have more capital to provide opportunities with while others are pushed out of the opportunity-giving system. And assuming high-talent people are better at recognizing talent, making every subject a potential opportunity giver, using the capital they make on their own given opportunities, would likely approximate the final state to one where the talented reward the talented more and thus a greater talent-capital match. That would make a case for decentralized systems, which I'm biased for, but, again, I wouldn't take a simulation that reducionist too seriously.

>>16708823
Are you implying the distribution of mental aptitude is significantly more Gaussian than distribution of physical aptitude?

This is /lit/ not /dia(lectic}/
fuck off with this shit
for real

It's the height of shitposting

>>16709125
I'm implying that due to how sports work, it leads to a higher sink or swim effect that weeds out the lucky more than anything in the non-athletic world.
Although just the same there are likely dozens of Micheal Jordan's out there that didn't get their chance.
How many Tiger Woods have we not gotten is a better question than whether Tiger Woods should be kneecapped so that everyone feels good about themselves.

I think that I may have to retract my caveat.
Athletics should be linked with the rest of my post.

>>16706809
if you're a woman, child, or faggot, yes

based cringe neolibs brainlets embracing being slaves of people who steal from you the stuff that you pay for and then go around misunderstanding nietzsche saying acting otherwise is slave morality lmao

>>16708021

I take it you’re a Jordan Peterson bucko

>>16708747
>deserve
No.

I’m reading through the posts here, and it seems that the divisiveness over sowell is mostly regarding an abstract question which isn’t relevant to the real economy. Since most of you don’t know how money works, it is a function of law and power held by a government - generally backed by military force. Money is mostly created in our society, if you live in the west, generally by banking institutions - who have been given the right to do so by government. Money is not a direct function of value with a 1:1 input:output ratio, but it is also used as a speculative instrument, which has distorted western economies into what’s accurately called “casino capitalism”, rather than any classical framework of capitalism as understood by pre-neoliberal economists. What this means, is that the elite rich in society right now, are generally so rich due to leveraging the available legal means to do so, including leveraging banking institutions and speculators to their advantage. Being against such market distortions is not communism, and it needn’t be fueled by a Nietzschean resentment. The issue with having a boatload of bezos’ is that the major gap being elite and non-elite historically leads to civil war, or risks turning us into third world tier undeveloped nations - as that elite money acts as a magnet sucking up all productive capital and monopolizing the market.

Many of you seem to be posting for the sake of your own conscience, to prove to yourself through anonymous posting that you aren’t possessed of slave morality - and such an interpretation completely misses the crucial points and is more like a personal psychological exercise.

>>16709691
Addendum to this post:

The problem with the arguments of the sowells and the Friedmans, is that in spite of them explicating the ideal state of being under an equilibrium theorized market, they’re used to paralyze real-world efforts to prevent the deevolution of society into financial casino capitalism, and oligarchy. It works because people generally value hard work, and believe that the uber elite are just using greater inputs to the non elites, when in 99% or cases they’re elite because of financialism and distortion of market capitalism.

So the efforts to reel on speculative, non productive, unearned income are paralyzed because you’ve been trained to believe that doing so is communism, fueled by resentment. While it may indeed be true for a certain category of people who just resent success, it needn’t be the case in totality - there’s no universal rule that striving against oligarchy and finance distortionism is communism.

>>16707537
seems you are only talking only about his economic reasonings, not his critique of leftists policies and their implementation. for example, your post has nothing to do with OP

>>16708630

>>16707537
At perfect equilibrium there would be no market because there would be no more price competition. The market exists to compensate for the inefficiencies in resource allocation which are ultimatelly inescapable to some degree. "Speculation" adds information to the market by modifying price signals. Assymetries exist in every natural or human system and the fact that information assymetries can be capitalized on creates incentives for people to independently place their own bets and this means more total information is put public. Plus market agents can look for whichever information sources they should trust more by comparing how profitable the respective bets are.

>>16709774

His reasoning against “leftist” aims is premised on his economic understanding. The point of my post was to demonstrate how that is an error, and while leftists are often insane and commit errors just as egregious, sowells aphorisms tend to make the economic neophyte think in black and white.

>>16707438
Butterfly, why didn't you make a movie instead of shitposting on /lit/ 12 hours a day for 10 years and flicking your bean to screenshots of pixie girls from 90s indie films?

>>16702624
t. Teen who hasn't lived a tough life

>>16709885

Your understanding is halfway correct, but the market is understood as a system wherein goods and services are exchanged, including exchange through money which has exchange value.

Your conception is distinct from that of Thomas sowell, as there’s no such precept that markets exist only to compensate for inefficiencies. Indeed, one of the major theories of the past century is Samuelsons efficient market hypothesis.

>>16709885

Addendum to previous reply:

While your conception is somewhat accurate insofar as the real workings of the market, there is a distortion regarding how policy is formed. Policy is formed premised on the views of mainstream economists, which strongly influences economic outcomes, and considering the efficient market hypothesis won the Nobel prize in economics in spite of its eminent falsehood, such distortions which arise from policy are encouraged by the sowell type of analysis.

>>16709691
>Money is not a direct function of value with a 1:1 input:output ratio
I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.

Total output is supposed to be more valuable higher than total input, otherwise there would be no point to any transformative proccess.

>The issue with having a boatload of bezos’
The issue is there being too few. We want more people to come up with better, more efficient organizations, to replace the old and stagnant with the new and dynamic, for strong businesses to close weak businesses, unnending apetites, creative destruction.

The most corrupt aspect of modern finnance is the propping up of zombie companies, usually because of democratic pretensions. Auto companies are bailed out because they employ so many workers. Banks are bailed out because they support so many savings and pensions. Coal companies and their towns are the best of the lot: their townspeople like their pay and benefits so much they'll vote for staying in their poisonous holes. The public will blame the people in charge of these orgs but politicians know they would be blamed instead if these orgs collapsed. This stagnating influence was predicted in Schumpter's Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy.

>>16710013

Quantity of money held is not indicative of value one brings to the real economy.

There is a productive economy of persons who build things, and an extractive economy- largely in finance, where the goal is wealth transfer from the real economy. This is why finance and banks generally don’t fund productive enterprises, and such enterprises must attain public funding or some sort of tax breaks.

As far as the bezos’, the issue is indeed having too many of them - that is, people who’ve accumulated enough cash money and money in high priced stock to shift the market on a whim. This has been understood since Aristotle, that a strong middle class is undermined by extreme wealth, and extreme wealth is generally a function of malfeasance.

>>16702566
>Even if he really were that much better than everyone else at making money, should the game really reward him with that much power when millions can't even afford housing?
Yes, because those people are worthless while he isn't.

>>16702429
>reading niggers unironically
yikes

>>16709931
I’m nearly fifty. Grow up.

>>16709902
I was trying to put myself through classes, but had to keep working fuller hours in order to live. It never panned out, I never made any connections in the industry. I let it go and learned to dream of other things.

>>16707564
It’s their problem is how I see it. I’m fine.

>>16707535
Books. Yeah.

>>16710641
>I’m nearly fifty
MOMMY

>>16710641
>It’s their problem is how I see it. I’m fine.
People wouldn't hate you If you had something of value to say. but you don't. also, don't you think that it's a bad sign that people mistake you for a spoiled teenager when you're nearly 50? honestly, if it wasn't common knowledge that you were a fucking hag I'd probably assume the same thing.

>>16703929
Cope.

>>16710699
Nobody likes you.

>>16710641
>Grow up.
You first. You're the one who pushes a nonsensical utopian ideal in every thread, a world where there is no money and no competition and somehow where the vast majority will be happy living in stasis like braindead gold fish in a tank, all because you're personally poor and you never got anywhere in your life. Why the fuck SHOULD you have gotten somewhere? What makes YOU deserving of that? Because you exist? Give me one solid, non-childish answer to those questions.

>>16710724
are your parents proud of you? or are they dead? do you think they died believing in you or do you think they spent their final moments despairing for their failure of a daughter?

>>16710742
It isn’t nonsensical. I say it would be better, far better, but not utopia.

>>16710763
They died believing in Jesus. All you’re getting.

>>16710777
You didn't answer.
>They died believing in Jesus.
Do you realize you're a walking meme?

>>16710742
People would want to compete the same way they would want to work. But since no one is trying to kill you or squash you into poverty, it’s a friendly competition, it’s an enjoyable work, unhurried, crafted. Life would be better like this. How could you deny it? “Stasis” is what you’re worried about? You mean sustainable? Not on a freight train over a cliff?
>YOU
It isn’t about me. I’ll be gone by 2080 or 90. I’m thinking of the people of those years and beyond. I worry about my generation and yours, but theirs are going to go through hell —if you and your type get their way

>>16710777
>They died believing in Jesus. All you’re getting.
Uh oh did I strike a nerve?

>>16710816
>p-people would just hold hands and keep working as janitors, plumbers, trashmen, taxi drivers, etc. even if there was no incentive to do so other than "sustainability!"
"Not a nonsensical utopian ideal" my ass. Life today is perfectly sustainable for those who deserve it. Again, what makes you deserving? Just because you exist?

>It isn’t about me.
Kek. Sure it isn't.

>>16710816
You'll be gone by 2040

>>16710851
Hopefully 4chan will be gone by then

I’ll be 100+

>>16710894
doesn't matter how long you love since you contribute nothing to society

These guys in the thread who assume ressentiment on the part of anyone who questions the wisdom of finance capitalism sucking up all the money in the economy are pathologically motivated. They feel that if they don't defend the filthy rich, that they are necessarily exercising slave morality, thus, to increase their sense of self worth, they worship billionaires, while maintaining a low-level of information on political economy.

It is easier to assume that billionaires are necessarily billionaires due to generating value, than it is to inspect the neoliberal economic system.

>>16711024
>These guys in the thread who assume ressentiment on the part of anyone who questions the wisdom of finance capitalism sucking up all the money in the economy are pathologically motivated.
It's the other way around. Middle to lower class people who defend capitalism are honest, hard working individuals who understand the need for and the justifiability of an economic hierarchy. It's the other side who focuses on fringe cases like Epstein to make their points against the system. Forming theories on exceptions is the definition of pathological.

>>16702429
A lot of mediocre people would be world class if they simply worked harder.

>>16703904
You know what leftists do that you can't? Get something useful out of black people.

>>16711037

Capitalism is good, but we don't live under any form of capitalist system which corresponds with the capitalism that created western wealth. We live under a finance capitalist system, where making money through speculation and financial innovation is the name of the game - and it is non-productive enterprise in the stead of productive enterprise, because non-productive enterprise is more profitable, and unearned income easier to accumulate than earned income. This is why classical political economy aimed at shedding the hereditary landlord class, in favor of an industrial form of production - and indeed, even at that time, financial institutions and banks were reluctant to invest in infrastructure and industry, because of the inherent risk involved.

What this means, is that in the case of today's billionaires, it is not just a few fringe exceptions that have taken the ticket and compromised morally in favor of short-term gains and wealth transfers, it is generally the rule. Companies like google, major investors like warren buffet - these have all benefitted through an anti-capitalistic leverage of contract law, and monopoly rights (patent law). This is contrary to capitalism, and indeed has stunted the economic growth of the western societies, manifest in the increasing boom-bust cycles, and increasing poverty as the majority of wages are transferred to landlords, who then transfer them to major banks, who then speculative gamble them under our casino capitalist system.

For reading on this, consult Michael Hudson, Steve Keen, Bill Mitchell, and offset them with some libertarian intellectuals like Peter Schiff.

>>16711065
This simply isn’t so.

>>16711114
I bet you consider yourself one such 'failed einstein', don't you?

>>16702566
yes. seethe more faggot

>>16711150
Are you new here?
I’m just an unrealized artist who’s worked hard to make a meager living in the most prosperous nation-state in history.
I hope my water supply isn’t full of lead

>>16711114
Gould is such a dishonest cancerous brainlet. He sets up a false dichotomy first of all, that you have to care about one or the other, which itself obscures the path you would take to finding such talent among the disenfranchised(standardized tests like IQ or even physical exams if we figured out a way), all just to grandstand about how ebinly ethical and empathetic he is, and to imply that anyone who would care to study how brains and intelligence work doesn't care about those things and is clearly a bad person. Only a *** could pack so much insidious misdirection into a single small sentence like this.

>>16711177
>Bezos work very hard for every penny he earned.
You’re so dumb

>>16711192
The pretzel you tie your brain into here for this worthless point...

>>16702429
Black people really followed Black Panthers instead of Sowell. LMAO

>>16711203
You don't even realize how much of a liar that man is. He wrote a book called the Mismeasure of Man which alleged that early measurements of skull sizes had been fudged for ideological purposes. He literally baldly lied about this, he and his team fudged their own measurements, and then accused the people they were crosschecking of having done so. That is only a fraction of the dishonesty and idiocy in that book, practically everything he wrote in it is bullshit, the entire thing is a strawman in the first place, and he misuses statistics and basically every other relevant tool there is, all to promote his political agenda that you cannot possibly study intelligence because it might show differences.

>>16711114
This just means "I want more geniuses who can save us from the subhuman apocalypse." Not whatever wishy-washy bullshit you have on your mind.

>16711215
>Phrenology is real!
Not even the fucking point of the quote.

>>16711220
It’s a plea for a humane world, bitchtits

>>16711227
>It’s a plea for a humane world
How's that when he's almost literally saying that he wishes we could pluck out geniuses from conditions which are prohibiting them from expressing themselves?

>>16711227
>phrenology
The research he was criticizing was a correlation between brain volume and IQ, a completely fucking reasonable thing to research. God I hate you faggots with you absolute inability to ever be even slightly honest about the topic we are discussing.

>>16711087
What books by those authors would you recommend? You seem to know to your shit

butterfly eats poo true story

>>16711114
>oy vey feel bad for niggers goy they're all geniuses but you held them down
Just like those niggers, you did not merit college.

>>16711188
You’ve never produced anything of value in your protracted nothing of an existence. Half a century of life and nothing to show for it.

>>16709537
Not at all. Jungian psychology is a dumb meme. But ngl I did steal that line off him. It's a good one.

>>16709897
i guess you are talking about his books because it's not like that in the few vids I've seen of him

but your point is moot, every expert in any field, when he writes reasons in a vacuum to a degree, working with what he knows and his opinions of it, this is the same for sowell or wolf (specially true on youtube, people talking past each other). calling out specifically sowell because his economic understanding doesn't take into account this or that factor is kinda unfair, you think sowell wouldn't also roll his eyes when wolf talks about socialism, thinking about all the things he is missing? that question was sarcastic but actually i wonder what you think

>>16711087
this sounds great, but people roll their eyes at it. is not that they are not open to believe it, we all like it when people are kinda evil and we find out and we fix it, but you don't prove that writing about it like this, just a reasoning of it that we can't agree nor disagree to without being an expert in several topics.

prove that this actually happens, show the law or mechanisms or whatever that allowed these injustices, so that politicians can talk about it and fix it. the problem is not that capitalism went bad, is that the political system allowed it to

>>16709265
You'll drop dead at 50 from bottling up all your emotions anon. Only children think that crying is gay or for girls or gives you cooties or whatever.

>>16709265
There's nothing wrong with crying, anon. Most times, crying comes with experiencing intense and sometimes beautiful emotions. Of course, there are times where crying isn't appropriate, but if you're not an autist you should know that.

>>16703854
>productive member of society

>>16710777
>They died believing in Jesus.
So much venom. Also wasted trips.

>>16702429
Looks like Richard Ayoade

>>16710641
>I’m nearly fifty
That makes it even more depressing
You lived for half a century and still retarded and don't understand how the world works

>>16702566
Where do you think he acquired this money(which is dramatically less in liquid terms than you think)? He didn't steal it. It was placed directly into his pockets by the hordes of mindless consumers who are the very same people who accuse him of being a 'fat cat capitalist'

>>16706893
>>16706911
Absolutely brutal. based

>>16711037
middle to lower class people who defend capitalism are either dumb brainwashed into thinking anything that isnt capitalism is Venezuela or delusional meritocracy psychos

>>16708049
then what determined his grandfather's fate?

>>16712388
What I do with my life isn’t anyone’s concern. I’d live as simply in my anarchist designs. If I were younger I’d’ve had a better chance at making films. What he calls laziness is my desire to retire and work full time at writing.
But he’s just typing in caps because he doesn’t like women in his safe space

>>16712586
You've had half a century to get this writing done butterfly. If you can't get you're writing done while also holding down a job then you don;t deserve the success. us your entire ideology a massive cope to help you deflect accountability for your personal failures? If you have all this time to shitpost on /lit/ then you have time to work on writing. and yet here you are

>>16702474
>confirming Sowell's argument
Damn even retards like you can be redpilled sometimes

>>16712422
On what aspect of capitalism are they brainwashed?

>>16702429
In what way would Mr Woods be penalized?

>>16712586
>But he’s just typing in caps because he doesn’t like women in his safe space
And? Is that supposed to be bad? The world has decided that every public space has to be a safe space for women, why can't men have, at least, an online safe space?