Scottish Independence! FREEDOM!

[mashleshmash]

NERP

[Lord hang man]

lol did anyone read how excited UM was then they just voted no and also he's banned. im just pointing this out for lulz i actually like him but it's poetic justice for those who get so butthurt as to hate him.

[Rizzo in a box]

all I need to do is look at the link. a forbes article, explaining why it would be a disaster. no doubt more moaning by the banks.\

Typical behavior of a leftist. You've been spending too much time around then and have become distorted by their influence. "I don't like the URL." Any excuse to justify your narrow mindedness.

Chrome/google sarch address bar > cache:link

xactly. Anything the banks say is motivated to increase their profits at the expense of all else. If they say something you can guarantee the better idea would be to do the opposite

That's not necessarily true. For example, economist Bryan Caplan finds that the rich do have much more influence on government policy than the poor, and that in the aggregate this is a good thing because poor people tend to be fucking idiots with horrible beliefs and ideas about the world.

http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2012/09/why_is_democrac.html

What makes you think that the average Scottish voter is so much better? Don't you think it's likely that commoners may choose policies that are bad for everyone?

Gee, when you're systematically oppressed and fucked out of money and education, yeah you might not have the best world view. However the rich, even if they are capable of making more intelligent decisions, are making their decisions solely in the interests of the big corporations that fill their pockets.

Typical behavior of a leftist. You've been spending too much time around then and have become distorted by their influence. "I don't like the URL." Any excuse to justify your narrow mindedness.

Who the fuck still uses terms like leftist? Get the fuck outta here.

Ugh not this shit again. Every time you types have an election go the other way you always run around screaming "IT WAS RIGGED!" with no supporting evidence whatsoever.

Get a grip.

Except I didn't start saying that until I saw some pretty clear cut evidence.

get a backbone, shill.

[John Smith]

However the rich, even if they are capable of making more intelligent decisions, are making their decisions solely in the interests of the big corporations that fill their pockets.

The standard self-interested voter hypothesis doesn't hold up. If by rich you mean the small fraction of a percentage that actually make their money mostly from corporations, and have political influence, then overall it's still less harmful than a dictatorship of the proletariat would be.

[Rizzo in a box]

However the rich, even if they are capable of making more intelligent decisions, are making their decisions solely in the interests of the big corporations that fill their pockets.

The standard self-interested voter hypothesis doesn't hold up. If by rich you mean the small fraction of a percentage that actually make their money mostly from corporations, and have political influence, then overall it's still less harmful than a dictatorship of the proletariat would be.

Riiiight. Less harmful than perpetual war, total dragnet surveillance, environmental destruction, infrastructure collapse, economic fraud and speculation, the erosion of all civil liberties...(all of which are in the interests of the multi-national corporations that run this planet)

I hardly see how the "proletariat" could make things much worse.

[John Smith]

However the rich, even if they are capable of making more intelligent decisions, are making their decisions solely in the interests of the big corporations that fill their pockets.

The standard self-interested voter hypothesis doesn't hold up. If by rich you mean the small fraction of a percentage that actually make their money mostly from corporations, and have political influence, then overall it's still less harmful than a dictatorship of the proletariat would be.

Riiiight. Less harmful than perpetual war, total dragnet surveillance, environmental destruction, infrastructure collapse, economic fraud and speculation, the erosion of all civil liberties...(all of which are in the interests of the multi-national corporations that run this planet)

I hardly see how the "proletariat" could make things much worse.

You people blame corporations and capitalism for everything. Look at the actual data, the poor are often more likely to support those policies. Do you really have a positive view of what the average poor person is like? Poor people are generally poor for a reason.

[Rizzo in a box]

However the rich, even if they are capable of making more intelligent decisions, are making their decisions solely in the interests of the big corporations that fill their pockets.

The standard self-interested voter hypothesis doesn't hold up. If by rich you mean the small fraction of a percentage that actually make their money mostly from corporations, and have political influence, then overall it's still less harmful than a dictatorship of the proletariat would be.

Riiiight. Less harmful than perpetual war, total dragnet surveillance, environmental destruction, infrastructure collapse, economic fraud and speculation, the erosion of all civil liberties...(all of which are in the interests of the multi-national corporations that run this planet)

I hardly see how the "proletariat" could make things much worse.

You people blame corporations and capitalism for everything. Look at the actual data, the poor are often more likely to support those policies. Do you really have a positive view of what the average poor person is like? Poor people are generally poor for a reason.

Poor people are manipulated quite easily by the rich because of the fact that they are undereducated and underinformed. Of course they'll support policies that are against their best interests when fat cat politicians using fear of terrorism and the promise of "jobs" and any other countless psychological tools they use.

Not only that, but it really doesn't matter whether those poor people support policies that contribute to the things I mentioned earlier, because it's the corporations that hire lobbyists that write the bills and then pay off the politicians to get them to vote for it.

Poor people aren't poor because there's anything inherently wrong with them, it comes down to a lack of education and opportunity. It's a simple facts that wages have not risen with the rest of the economy. It's not just "poor" people that are at a disadvantage, the middle class is shrinking and has far less purchasing power than it did decades ago.

But whatever, if you want to believe the disenfranchised and powerless majority is the cause of our social ills and not the people with actual power then that's your ignorant perogative.

[John Smith]

There are clear strong correlations with income/wealth and intelligence, personality variables, and even heredity and observed biological differences, on average. People with low IQs are far far more likely to be poor and criminal and this can't realistically be changed, efforts always fail due to refusing to accept or ignoring the genetic factor. Is it really that hard to accept that people who fall lower on the scale of positive traits will be much more likely to naturally be poor? When you really speak to long term poor you realize that they're generally unintelligent, vapid people, devoid of worthwhile thoughts.

Look at pop culture. Do you know why those low class tv programs, and the celebrity industry, make so much money and demand so much attention? It's not due to a conspiracy to brainwash everyone and make them stupid, it's simply a reflection of consumer demand, just like with food. The reality is that those are the tastes, the desires, of the common man due to their own endogenous stupidity.

I'm not afraid to say it. Fuck the poor!

[Rizzo in a box]

There are clear strong correlations with income/wealth and intelligence, personality variables, and even heredity and observed biological differences, on average. People with low IQs are far far more likely to be poor and criminal and this can't realistically be changed, efforts always fail due to refusing to accept or ignoring the genetic factor. Is it really that hard to accept that people who fall lower on the scale of positive traits will be much more likely to naturally be poor? When you really speak to long term poor you realize that they're generally unintelligent, vapid people, devoid of worthwhile thoughts.

Look at pop culture. Do you know why those low class tv programs, and the celebrity industry, make so much money and demand so much attention? It's not due to a conspiracy to brainwash everyone and make them stupid, it's simply a reflection of consumer demand, just like with food. The reality is that those are the tastes, the desires, of the common man due to their own endogenous stupidity.

I'm not afraid to say it. Fuck the poor!

Haha, wow, you really are that dumb. Yes, when you're given a substandard education, thrown into jail, have a substandard diet, among the many other problems "poor" people have to put up with...yeah, you might have a lower IQ or whatever other elitist form of judging a person you might have. That doesn't mean that there is something inherently wrong with poor people, or something inherently better about rich people who are given everything they could possibly want (and still turn into awful human beings).

Wasn't the American dream that anyone could work their way up from the bottom to the top? Wouldn't that dream make no sense to have if all poor people are inherently inferior?

Not that it matters, you don't really care about right or wrong or facts or anything else. You just want to be on the "winning" side so you can wave your dick around and act like you're not getting just as fucked by the rich as everyone else.

[Ninja]

There are clear strong correlations with income/wealth and intelligence, personality variables, and even heredity and observed biological differences, on average. People with low IQs are far far more likely to be poor and criminal and this can't realistically be changed, efforts always fail due to refusing to accept or ignoring the genetic factor. Is it really that hard to accept that people who fall lower on the scale of positive traits will be much more likely to naturally be poor? When you really speak to long term poor you realize that they're generally unintelligent, vapid people, devoid of worthwhile thoughts.

I'm extremely intelligent.  I'm a fucking god.  And, yet, I'm poor.

[John Smith]

Conscientiousness.

No, Rizzo, those factors do not account for the group differences of the poor.

[Rizzo in a box]

Oh, right. I obviously believe you now.

[Ninja]

My bloodline is shit.  But, somehow I was born.  It's a goddamn miracle.

[Cory]

Except I didn't start saying that until I saw some pretty clear cut evidence.

Citation?

get a backbone, shill.

The shill gambit is a type of ad hominem and poisoning the well wherein one party dismisses the other's arguments by proclaiming them to be on the payroll of some agency. It usually goes something like this:

Alice: "There is absolutely no evidence that explosives were planted in the Twin Towers".

Bob: "Ah, I knew it, another Bush administration shill spreading disinfo! Go spew your lies somewhere else, shill!"

[FON]

There are clear strong correlations with income/wealth and intelligence, personality variables, and even heredity and observed biological differences, on average. People with low IQs are far far more likely to be poor and criminal and this can't realistically be changed, efforts always fail due to refusing to accept or ignoring the genetic factor. Is it really that hard to accept that people who fall lower on the scale of positive traits will be much more likely to naturally be poor? When you really speak to long term poor you realize that they're generally unintelligent, vapid people, devoid of worthwhile thoughts.

Look at pop culture. Do you know why those low class tv programs, and the celebrity industry, make so much money and demand so much attention? It's not due to a conspiracy to brainwash everyone and make them stupid, it's simply a reflection of consumer demand, just like with food. The reality is that those are the tastes, the desires, of the common man due to their own endogenous stupidity.

I'm not afraid to say it. Fuck the poor!

It isn't solely low IQs that causes people to fall into poverty or become criminals. Yes, there is a correlation, but by focusing on the individual you ignore external factors and alternative explanations, of which there can be many. It's also interesting that you think pop culture is purely a product of the desires and whims of the poor, which in turn stem from their lack of intelligence. Aside from the painfully obvious fact that tastes and desires are not a product of intelligence, this sort of deterministic view simply fails to account for the complexity of society. Pop culture, like any sort of culture, is shaped by forces in society as well as at the individual level.  I honestly wouldn't go attacking the poor on the basis of their IQ while spouting these sort of half-baked ideas.