|
when a liberal says they support social security and medicare, you have to ask them to clarify. "supporting" in their minds might include cutting these programs in the rationalization that you need to cut them so they don't go "bankrupt"
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2017 01:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:10 |
|
|
Goldwater was the first Republican presidential candidate to win Georgia, ever There was a lot going on in 1964 and Goldwater was an incredibly bad campaigner, but the ramifications of the Dems' support for civil rights were beginning to show even then. Vietnam alone doesn't explain why a segregationist third-party candidate in 1968 won five states and got more votes than the Democrat in three more
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
rudatron posted:The 'racists killed populism' is nothing but a convenient lie liberals tell themselves - they killed it, with their own hands.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:when a liberal says they support social security and medicare, you have to ask them to clarify. "supporting" in their minds might include cutting these programs in the rationalization that you need to cut them so they don't go "bankrupt" that appears to me to be a conservative view point, it's highly familiar to me
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Goldwater was the first Republican presidential candidate to win Georgia, ever Quality avtext/post combo
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4n3SI81m9w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bO5V-6rbN7I
|
|
#
?
Apr 11, 2017 01:08
|
|
|
https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/04/can-brain-science-pull-families-out-of-poverty/523479/
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
Top City Homo posted:https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/04/can-brain-science-pull-families-out-of-poverty/523479/ Prolonged stress can damage your brain, news at 11.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 01:48
|
|
|
Alienwarehouse posted:Prolonged stress can damage your brain, news at 11. but don't you like how their solution involves zero wealth redistribution and all about individual redemption? this is why liberals breed fascists
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 02:39
|
|
|
"You can take control of your life!" is just the patronizing flip side of "You're poor because you're stupid and lazy!".
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AP/status/854835790521696256
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
It sounds like they've proven that a) poverty affects the brain and one's ability to escape the stresses it creates and b) a personalized coaching team can give you the support you need to escape.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 05:15
|
|
|
Top City Homo posted:but don't you like how their solution involves zero wealth redistribution and all about individual redemption? Oh, it bothers me. Maybe we could have Antifa start protesting outside of corporate media headquarters until they address the problem instead of assaulting uneducated, hillbilly Trump voters.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 06:00
|
|
|
Top City Homo posted:but don't you like how their solution involves zero wealth redistribution and all about individual redemption? Liberalism = capitalism + meritocracy. I make $1 a year more than you, therefore I am superior to you. Are you trying to tell me I'm no better than some fat bitch who listen to country music and works at WalMart?!?! Some of us went to Brown.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 06:04
|
|
|
This is why early childhood intervention is so incredibly important, and also why poverty tends to be a generational issue. Aside from the permanent brain changes and maladaptive decision making caused by growing up with extreme stress poor kids tend to have enormous word gaps and delayed development. That hampers those kids from succeeding later in life. Rinse repeat when they have kids. Its also why policy aimed at increasing economic stability is so incredibly important, and why the woke lords insisting they can hold out for a perfect solution that is tailored to them are so incredibly loving dumb. Kids can't get their childhood back. Undoing the damage later in life is vastly more difficult and costly. E: There were people on this very forum genuinely arguing that economic justice policies that helped white people at all should be rejected because they supported white supremacy. Like, how do you respond to that in a rational manner? Nix Panicus fucked around with this message at 06:12 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 06:08
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:This is why early childhood intervention is so incredibly important, and also why poverty tends to be a generational issue. Aside from the permanent brain changes and maladaptive decision making caused by growing up with extreme stress poor kids tend to have enormous word gaps and delayed development. That hampers those kids from succeeding later in life. Rinse repeat when they have kids. It doesn't count as woke if you don't get to play great white saviour
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 06:14
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:This is why early childhood intervention is so incredibly important, and also why poverty tends to be a generational issue. Aside from the permanent brain changes and maladaptive decision making caused by growing up with extreme stress poor kids tend to have enormous word gaps and delayed development. That hampers those kids from succeeding later in life. Rinse repeat when they have kids. Pseudoscience like this is also a problem. The economic and social station of the poor is consistent with their biological and psychological inferiority. "Science" says that they are where they belong, just as surely as God or the Karmic wheel would put them in their proper place. We should cut our losses but perhaps, with sufficient intervention, there is hope for the next generation?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 06:16
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:This is why early childhood intervention is so incredibly important, and also why poverty tends to be a generational issue. Aside from the permanent brain changes and maladaptive decision making caused by growing up with extreme stress poor kids tend to have enormous word gaps and delayed development. That hampers those kids from succeeding later in life. Rinse repeat when they have kids.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 08:00
|
|
|
Top City Homo posted:https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/04/can-brain-science-pull-families-out-of-poverty/523479/ Hahahaha this is pretty much the most liberal thing ever. Liberals get wet to the idea of fixing poverty with ~elegant~ solutions involving science/technology that don't actually require any significant material sacrifice on the part of the wealthy. Their mindset is more or less "I genuinely want to fix poverty, but we should hold off on things like significant tax increases because maybe there's a better more elegant solution!" It's basically a rationalization to paper over what is essentially a selfish fear of losing their current privileged status.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 08:00
|
|
|
Agag posted:Pseudoscience like this is also a problem. The economic and social station of the poor is consistent with their biological and psychological inferiority. "Science" says that they are where they belong, just as surely as God or the Karmic wheel would put them in their proper place. We should cut our losses but perhaps, with sufficient intervention, there is hope for the next generation? Barring genetic and gestational gently caress ups all baby brains are basically the same and have the same potential. Environment is the real shaping force, and we can and should do something about it. Science says that they arent poor because they have short term focused decision making, but that they have short term focused decision making because they are poor. We can fix poor. And I'm not saying the adults are a lost cause, but I am saying it is a whole lot cheaper and easier to make sure kids don't get screwed by their environment. Also, psuedoscience? Why would you think the stress associated with poverty wouldn't have a lasting physiological impact? Do you also think people with depression should just get over it?
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 08:04
|
|
|
comedyblissoption posted:but would that solve racism? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HK2lNuiD7gM
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 08:05
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Hahahaha this is pretty much the most liberal thing ever. Liberals get wet to the idea of fixing poverty with ~elegant~ solutions involving science/technology that don't actually require any significant material sacrifice on the part of the wealthy. Their mindset is more or less "I genuinely want to fix poverty, but we should hold off on things like significant tax increases because maybe there's a better more elegant solution!" It's basically a rationalization to paper over what is essentially a selfish fear of losing their current privileged status. My wife has a PhD in Cognitive Science and works with another non-profit doing similar programs. The goal is to do more with less, because nobody is funding full scale interventions and the nobody in government really seems interested in doing anything to address economic justice and equality (except Bernie, PBUH). So finding relatively cheap ways to help bridge the gap for low income kids is the best they can do. The researchers aren't sitting on a lever that says FULL COMMUNISM NOW but don't want to pull it because it would inconvenience them. They're trying to find ways to have maximum impact with the resources they have at hand. Simple poo poo like helping parents feel more confident with their kids and encouraging early literacy pays huge dividends and is a relatively cheap program to implement. Bash government all you want, because those people can help and choose not to because they don't give a poo poo. Don't bash the researchers doing their damnedest to turn scarce resources into some kind of improvement in quality of life. E: Also bash journalists for coming to extremely dumb conclusions if you want Nix Panicus fucked around with this message at 08:21 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 08:13
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Hahahaha this is pretty much the most liberal thing ever. Liberals get wet to the idea of fixing poverty with ~elegant~ solutions involving science/technology that don't actually require any significant material sacrifice on the part of the wealthy. Their mindset is more or less "I genuinely want to fix poverty, but we should hold off on things like significant tax increases because maybe there's a better more elegant solution!" It's basically a rationalization to paper over what is essentially a selfish fear of losing their current privileged status. I think there's an additional element to this in that rank and file liberals who will never be rich, still support this mindset because they assume that it's politically impossible to overcome the power of moneyed interests.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 08:32
|
|
|
I don't think anyone is bashing the researchers, nor the programs that can presumably help the poor. But reread that article. Running through it is the assumption that poverty is created by people Not Taking Control of they're lives, and this program Helps Teach Them. It shifts the burden of blame, from a society that creates poverty and economic inequality, which does gently caress people up mentally, onto those poverty. For a lot of people lives, the majority of their welfare factually is out of their control. Eg- You can throw around as many resumes as you want, but whether you find employment is not up to you. It's outside your power. That this state of affairs 'teaches' those in poverty that they are powerless, is not insanity, but normal brain function - learning from past experiences to inform future ones. It's not something that can be cured, anymore than you can cure people of any other learning skill (eg- playing the guitar). Its just what the brain does, by default. Telling them that their position is a consequence of them not exercising their power, however much charitable liberal stuff you couch that in, is just not believable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 08:52
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:I think there's an additional element to this in that rank and file liberals who will never be rich, still support this mindset because they assume that it's politically impossible to overcome the power of moneyed interests.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 08:57
|
|
|
It is seriously stupid to take a top-down approach. The article basically describes what we've known about poverty for years (such as Maslow's hierarchy of needs). Poorbrains have poorbrains because they are in a daily stuggle for basic needs. It isn't their brain's way of thinking that needs fixed, the brain is actually the one thing going for them that makes sure they aren't starving to death, it is security of their needs that needs fixed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 09:02
|
|
|
rudatron posted:I don't think anyone is bashing the researchers, nor the programs that can presumably help the poor. Ok, the article is bad, but the science is good. Executive function and planning horizons are real things that poverty has a real affect on. The programs are trying their best with the funds available to assist both parent and child. The people actually doing the research and working with these programs don't give a poo poo about shifting blame or societal responsibilities, they want to help actual real people in actual real poverty. At some point the rubber has to hit the road and the idealism and philosophy has to be put aside for real humans. Like, this is not some abstract game for my wife or for me. Her organization has the social workers share stories at monthly meetings to constantly humanize their work. Those families want whats best for their kids and understand that growing up in poverty is rough, and they want any advice or goods they can get to make sure their kids have better lives than they had. Its the most universal and human impulse there is. So I can understand wanting to poo poo on some dipshit at the Atlantic who thinks cognitive therapy is a substitute for substantive economic justice, but don't poo poo on the entire field and mission because you think its just a blame shifting game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 09:15
|
|
|
I'm not making GBS threads on the research dude, I'm just averse to medicalizing/pathologizing what's a social condition. I'm sure this will help people deal with problems, but it's treating a symptom. I'm doubtful such measures are actually going to make people 'escape' poverty, but perhaps make it more livable/survivable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 09:24
|
|
|
Alpha Mayo posted:It is seriously stupid to take a top-down approach. The article basically describes what we've known about poverty for years (such as Maslow's hierarchy of needs). Poorbrains have poorbrains because they are in a daily stuggle for basic needs. It isn't their brain's way of thinking that needs fixed, the brain is actually the one thing going for them that makes sure they aren't starving to death, it is security of their needs that needs fixed. Obviously the best solution is to relieve economic hardship so that 'poorbrains' don't need to struggle for basic needs (although even then assistance transitioning to long term planning would *still* be valuable). But given that the organizations involved here don't have secret FULL COMMUNISM NOW levers the best they can do is manage a lovely situation and try to take some of the sting out of poverty as best they can. They are trying to come up with the way to have the highest impact for the most people with not a lot of money or influence. Cognitive therapy and better plans for social workers are relatively cheap interventions that can pay huge dividends. If these organizations had the money to provide real security to people they would, but they don't, so they're doing what they can with what they have. Don't attack people for trying. Attack people for not trying. Attack people for thinking that because low cost methods developed out of desperation exist thats good enough and poverty is solved forever. Attack people who turn their nose up at triage because it doesn't fix everything. But never attack people who are actually trying. Again, if everyone is making fun of some dipshit journalist for touting a lesson plan as the silver bullet for poverty thats cool. gently caress that guy. But if you're mad that people are trying to address the very real maladaptive decision making born out of poverty to try and alleviate poverty and suffering, then gently caress you. I'm touchy about this because it's personal, and I know from experience that no one else gives a gently caress and the state would gladly ignore the poor entirely if they could.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 09:36
|
|
|
rudatron posted:I'm not making GBS threads on the research dude, I'm just averse to medicalizing/pathologizing what's a social condition. I'm sure this will help people deal with problems, but it's treating a symptom. I'm doubtful such measures are actually going to make people 'escape' poverty, but perhaps make it more livable/survivable. Its a social condition that leads to systemic physiological changes though. You wouldn't tell someone with depression from living in poverty that it was actually a social condition and therefore SSRIs and CBT are really just treating a symptom. I don't know why people are so consistently weird about mental health not being a real thing. E: Maybe people are having difficulty with the relationship between cause and effect? Poverty *causes* 'poorbrain'. 'Poorbrain' does *not* cause poverty. Treating 'poorbrain' as a symptom of poverty is absolutely a thing that should be done, much like you treat the symptoms of any illness to bring relief to the patient WHILE you ALSO treat the illness itself. Nonprofits can't really do much about systemic poverty though, its not really their scope, no matter how much the Republicans might say otherwise. Thats a government job. Nix Panicus fucked around with this message at 09:48 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 09:41
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:Obviously the best solution is to relieve economic hardship so that 'poorbrains' don't need to struggle for basic needs (although even then assistance transitioning to long term planning would *still* be valuable). But given that the organizations involved here don't have secret FULL COMMUNISM NOW levers the best they can do is manage a lovely situation and try to take some of the sting out of poverty as best they can. They are trying to come up with the way to have the highest impact for the most people with not a lot of money or influence. Cognitive therapy and better plans for social workers are relatively cheap interventions that can pay huge dividends. If these organizations had the money to provide real security to people they would, but they don't, so they're doing what they can with what they have. Don't attack people for trying. once these guys finish making people able to survive worse and worse poverty, the problem of poverty will be considered solved. so no, they shouldn't be thanked for working hard to make poor people better able to receive abuse
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 09:42
|
|
|
Condiv posted:once these guys finish making people able to survive worse and worse poverty, the problem of poverty will be considered solved. so no, they shouldn't be thanked for working hard to make poor people better able to receive abuse You're being incredibly dumb. These people have absolutely no power to make poor people be not poor, but they can help make being poor suck slightly less.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 09:50
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:You're being incredibly dumb. These people have absolutely no power to make poor people be not poor, but they can help make being poor suck slightly less. and they're only being allowed to do that cause it allows the rich to abuse the poor even more hooray capitalism, perverting possibly good developments into the tools of satan!
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 09:51
|
|
|
Condiv posted:and they're only being allowed to do that cause it allows the rich to abuse the poor even more Patient: I have cancer and it hurts to just be alive. Doctor: I can't cure you, but I can help you not be in crippling pain all the time Condiv, loading a shotgun: No, it will only prolong the suffering
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 09:54
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:Patient: I have cancer and it hurts to just be alive. ftfy
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 09:58
|
|
|
Guys, take a step back. No one is blaming or mocking the researchers, or suggesting that their programs aren't helpful. My point wasn't about the research itself, but the way it's being framed. I'm not seeing any real disagreement here. Chill.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 10:01
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Guys, take a step back. i don't think research into making crushing poverty more liveable is particularly good at this moment. i mean, in theory the kind of psychiatric treatments that would stem from such research could be useful, but in reality it will just be used to further oppress people and suppress deserved backlashes the prime interest in research like that nowadays is from the capitalist class that would love to have a pill they could mix into our food that makes us stop demanding living wages and healthcare Condiv fucked around with this message at 10:09 on Apr 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 10:07
|
|
|
But neither you nor I have the power to choose between these schemes and real economic security. They're better than nothing, so I'm not going to complain that they merely exist. They're just not a substitute for real social change. That's the way they should be seen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 10:09
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Guys, take a step back. Framing *is* super important. I see important research and social programs that can be applied to help relieve or at least ameliorate some of the symptoms of poverty and materially improve lives, especially by helping children build resiliency and bridge the word gap. Its very attractive because it potentially offers a lot of impact for a relatively low investment, which is great because anti-poverty nonprofits aren't exactly rolling in cash. Others see a way to cop out of addressing systemic economic inequality by claiming poverty really isn't so bad and can be 'solved' through science voodoo. I really, really, really hate that kind of person, almost as much as I hate the people who believe that if we can't fix everything we should instead fix nothing. And apparently Condiv sees 'Hail Satan' printed a thousand times.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 10:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:10 |
|
|
rudatron posted:But neither you nor I have the power to choose between these schemes and real economic security. They're better than nothing, so I'm not going to complain that they merely exist. They're just not a substitute for real social change. That's the way they should be seen. actually i think it's worse than nothing cause it won't be used to help people who are suffering from economic insecurity, but rather to numb them to it so the capitalist class can inflict even worse economic conditions on them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2017 10:11
|
|