|
Risky Bisquick posted:
Your DNS is hosed son.
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 16:15
|
|
Have you been donating to JP
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
Postess with the Mostest posted:My jira is fine? In as much as I understand equity to mean equality of outcome instead of equality of opportunity, I don't accept it. I might as well just throw this out there, nobody in our current society is saying they actually want equality of outcome like it's a dystopian future where we all wear grey jumpsuits and eat the same gruel every morning, no matter what Jordan Peterson says about the left and cultural marxists who want us all to live in Zamyatin's We. What people are typically saying when they talk about equity is trying to actually achieve equality of opportunity (by making efforts to equalize the luck-of-the-draw factor associated with one's birth, i.e. race, gender, sexuality, class, etc., which is not only beneficial on an individual level because people have a better chance of leading enjoyable lives instead of getting caught in poverty and inequality traps, but also on a societal level because there's less chance of the next Einstein's potential going unrealized) instead of claiming our current society already provides perfect equality of opportunity and therefore we shouldn't change anything. Nobody is actually arguing for equality of outcome vs. equality of opportunity, that's a (very effective) smear by the right again anti-inequality campaigners. The actual argument is about equal versus preferential treatment, i.e. whether we institute policies that purport to be blind to difference (thus perpetuating inequalities because kids with advantages will compound those advantages over time and, in aggregate, grow up to be more successful adults, while kids with disadvantages will compound those disadvantages over time and, in aggregate, grow up to be less successful adults), or whether we institute policies that recognize difference and try to equalize opportunity by counteracting the disadvantages certain groups have (theoretically overcoming inequality by giving everyone equal opportunities to succeed). Bearing that in mind, I really do wonder how you think teaching children that gay and trans people exist and that's okay is promoting equality of outcome.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 16:18
|
|
|
Orientation and identity positivity is definitely something I agree on being mandatory teaching. Am I wrong to think a lot of history in school is aimed at tackling social issues through the lens of how humans hosed up in the past? Personal anecdote: I don't really remember any sex-ed stuff ever being down on it, but I don't really remember it talking about it much in general. I have a really bizarre memory of a teacher saying homophobia was the fear of being gay and asking if anyone was (I recall raising my hand) - it seems super messed up in retrospect and I wonder if it was just a dream but it really doesn't feel like it? I don't think growing up I ever felt being gay was wrong, but there was so much media and culture that made it feel like it was this undesirable thing and I know for a long time I found myself questioning and kinda worrying, even though I knew my parents and friends probably wouldn't care?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 16:27
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1019589341247664128
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 16:30
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:And what does "terrible ideological equity poo poo" refer to, specifically? Yeah I'm waiting for some kind of lovely justification on that
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
https://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4746588 Jesus Christ this story about the Mile End apartment in Quebec is hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:You joke but here's the listener shares from Winnipeg's May radio sweeps I'm willing to wager that the majority of the shares come from people over 55, especially with AM radio.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 16:46
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:Yeah I'm waiting for some kind of lovely justification on that You're going to be waiting for about 5 and a half hours in that case
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 16:47
|
|
|
This is something we should have been doing for the last few decades, but better late than never.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
Can't wait for this to result in the trade minister putting all their resources into building the lovely pipeline.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 16:55
|
|
|
 I like how Trudeau is not taking any poo poo from the US right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 16:57
|
|
|
MR. CARR BUILD THAT PIPELINE The most interesting reshuffle is this one quote:In one surprise move, Bill Blair, a former Toronto police chief who has been the government's point man on the marijuana legalization file, was appointed minister of border security and organized crime reduction. He will also be in charge of managing the hot-button issue of irregular migration with asylum seekers crossing into Canada from the U.S. DariusLikewise fucked around with this message at 17:07 on Jul 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 17:03
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/manitobahydro/status/1019620855167537158 Manitoba Hydro IPO imminent
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
infernal machines posted:This is something we should have been doing for the last few decades, but better late than never. Totally. Russia's been right next door this whole time!
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 17:43
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:MR. CARR BUILD THAT PIPELINE Cool, so we'll illegally put refugees in cages in the middle of summer without water?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 18:02
|
|
|
Nah we'll just shuffle them around to two or three dozen foster homes, gently caress them around on their citizenship and then try to deport them when they're inevitably convicted of something. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/abdoul-abdi-deportation-1.4751128 quote:Ottawa will not pursue the deportation of a former child refugee and convicted criminal to Somalia, according to Minister of Public Safety Ralph Goodale.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 18:04
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:https://twitter.com/manitobahydro/status/1019620855167537158 Link not working. What did it say?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 18:40
|
|
|
DariusLikewise posted:The most interesting reshuffle is this one Man who loves violating people's rights given portfolio over those who have the fewest rights to violate.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 18:43
|
|
|
Coxswain Balls posted:Link not working. What did it say? Weird, they must have re-posted it. Kelvin Shepherd is stepping down as CEO of Hydro https://twitter.com/manitobahydro/status/1019626997092364289
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 18:50
|
|
|
https://www.thestar.com/amp/news/queenspark/2018/07/17/tempers-flare-as-ford-horwath-clash-on-police-oversight.html In which Doug Ford acts like an rear end in a top hat in a house session. https://edmontonjournal.com/news/local-news/david-staples-in-new-social-studies-curriculum-theres-no-such-things-as-albertans/amp In which an Albertan rear end in a top hat gets upset that the school curriculum isn't teaching kids about Albertans and is instead amplifying studies of the damage settler colonies did to indigenous groups. Arc Hammer fucked around with this message at 19:48 on Jul 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 19:41
|
|
|
flakeloaf posted:Man who loves violating people's rights given portfolio over those who have the fewest rights to violate. I still dont get why the Liberals keep him around. With all his baggage and tendency to do stupid poo poo he is a ticking time bomb of controversy that they could easily dodge. Arcsquad12 posted:https://www.thestar.com/amp/news/queenspark/2018/07/17/tempers-flare-as-ford-horwath-clash-on-police-oversight.html Trump's gonna have lots of competition as worst politician at the rate ol Douggie is going.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 19:54
|
|
|
Schreiner "signed up to do politics differently" and Dougie obliged.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 20:04
|
|
|
Furnaceface posted:I still dont get why the Liberals keep him around. With all his baggage and tendency to do stupid poo poo he is a ticking time bomb of controversy that they could easily dodge. The Liberals can't resist a big name even if that name is only big because everyone hates them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 20:14
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:I might as well just throw this out there, nobody in our current society is saying they actually want equality of outcome I kinda want a little bit more equality of outcome. Why is it that someone who's gifted with more creative ability, or technological know how deserve so much more of the wealth created than the people who work extremely difficult jobs that are necessary to society, regardless of whether or not they take some high level of aptitude? Why does the person that cleans our bathrooms, picks up our litter, sells us the goods and services we need to live in a modern society, or even literally digs our ditches, deserve so little? Why does someone who has the capability to work in the white collar world that I have more than enough first hand experience to know is a lot of meaningless drivel, slacking, and only the appearance of productivity, deserve so much?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 20:22
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:I kinda want a little bit more equality of outcome. Uh privilege, class, and tribalism. Also global capitalism needs inequality in order to extract profits through arbitrage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 20:26
|
|
|
Can we get a phys ed curriculum that teaches our kids to be active, without the terrible ideological equity poo poo the libs call "sportspersonship"?
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 20:32
|
|
|
Privilege class tribalism and global capitalism can all choke to death on a giant bag of dicks, IMHO.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 20:33
|
|
|
EvilJoven posted:I kinda want a little bit more equality of outcome. That's an excellent point and a fair critique of what I've said, and something I overlooked in trying to make the basic point of my post. You're absolutely right that we should aim for more equality of outcome than we currently have (though I would also argue that achieving actual equality of opportunity would require a lot of this--i.e. a janitor needs to get paid a hell of a lot more than they're currently paid if you want to ensure that that janitor's children have equal opportunities to the children of CEOs, or even to ensure that the janitor themself has the opportunity to make their life better; and, conversely, the CEOs should probably be making a hell of a lot less), and that's part of the end goal of reducing inequality. Everyone, regardless of aptitude or talent, deserves a dignified and fulfilling life. On top of that, if you're talented enough to make the world a better and richer place, no matter what your circumstances, that opportunity should be open to you. However, if you're in a debate with a right winger, I would lump all that under the headline of "equality of opportunity" (i.e. in order to have equality of opportunity, we need to have severely reduced inequality in general) because the right has been very effective at making "equality of outcome" sound like a Soviet caricature where everyone queues for ten hours to get one square of toilet paper each, and arguing in favour of it even in the reasonable form that you're describing is going to be difficult.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 20:35
|
|
|
Yeah I'm actually wanting a lot more equality of outcome, not just opportunity. A totally level capitalist playing field would be a huge improvement, but "equality of opportunity" to me just sounds like "allow more minority CEO's". Like great, more women and racialized groups can have the opportunity to become brutal exploitative bosses thanks to a equality of opportunity. The problem is "opportunity" in our society and economy is generally the opportunity to exploit others. I really would like to see equality of outcome, where a fairly lazy janitor isn't that much materially worse off than the genius surgeon. Everyone should be compensated for their labour, but the hourly compensation should not be so wide to see the same number of hours doing useful work leading to the outcome of one of them struggling to afford food and shelter and the other having time to protest the new yacht tax. (but yeah, for selling these sort of ideas to the right and liberal capitalists, it's not bad language to use)
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 20:37
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Yeah I'm actually wanting a lot more equality of outcome, not just opportunity. A totally level capitalist playing field would be a huge improvement, but "equality of opportunity" to me just sounds like "allow more minority CEO's". Like great, more women and racialized groups can have the opportunity to become brutal exploitative bosses thanks to a equality of opportunity. The problem is "opportunity" in our society and economy is generally the opportunity to exploit others. I really would like to see equality of outcome, where a fairly lazy janitor isn't that much materially worse off than the genius surgeon. Everyone should be compensated for their labour, but the hourly compensation should not be so wide to see the same number of hours doing useful work leading to the outcome of one of them struggling to afford food and shelter and the other having time to protest the new yacht tax. Good luck with tax reform and social welfare redistribution because it continues to go in the opposite direction that you would prefer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 20:47
|
|
|
cowofwar posted:Good luck with tax reform and social welfare redistribution because it continues to go in the opposite direction that you would prefer. I remember reading a pretty depressing article a few months back that covered this. It basically said that over the last 20 years Canada has almost caught up to the US in income inequality and percentage of wealth going to the top 1% while our social safety net continues to suffer death from 1000 cuts. Sadly we have been well conditioned by both the Liberals and Cons to be happy as long as we are still marginally better than them. e: I think Helsing or vyelkin posted it here. Ill see if I cant find it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 20:56
|
|
|
e.
infernal machines fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Jul 18, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
Furnaceface posted:I remember reading a pretty depressing article a few months back that covered this. It basically said that over the last 20 years Canada has almost caught up to the US in income inequality and percentage of wealth going to the top 1% while our social safety net continues to suffer death from 1000 cuts. Politicians know that their votes are assured for so long as there is someone else at the bottom. It doesn’t matter if a voter’s absolute income or privilege drops for so long as the lower class is maintained and the lower class’ income and privilege doesn’t relatively increase. Interestingly, the same voters are not sensitive to relative increases in income or privilege of higher classes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 21:05
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Yeah I'm actually wanting a lot more equality of outcome, not just opportunity. A totally level capitalist playing field would be a huge improvement, but "equality of opportunity" to me just sounds like "allow more minority CEO's". Like great, more women and racialized groups can have the opportunity to become brutal exploitative bosses thanks to a equality of opportunity. The problem is "opportunity" in our society and economy is generally the opportunity to exploit others. I really would like to see equality of outcome, where a fairly lazy janitor isn't that much materially worse off than the genius surgeon. Everyone should be compensated for their labour, but the hourly compensation should not be so wide to see the same number of hours doing useful work leading to the outcome of one of them struggling to afford food and shelter and the other having time to protest the new yacht tax. I see your point, but I think you're oversimplifying when you say that opportunity is mostly exploitative. I'm considering opportunity in a much broader sense--i.e. not just the opportunity to become a billionaire CEO, but the opportunity to become that genius surgeon in the first place. There are so many steps between birth and becoming a surgeon that you can be a genius from day one but get derailed at one of a million points in your life due to disadvantages of your birth--poverty, racialization, gender, sexuality, etc., so that we don't end up with a society where the most skilled people become surgeons, we end up with one where the most skilled people who weren't derailed along the way through no fault of their own become surgeons, which is where the Jay Bee Pee "hierarchy of competence" breaks down. So when we look at these examples in a broader sense, it isn't just that the lazy janitor should have a good life compared to the genius surgeon, which they should, it's also that the genius janitor and the lazy surgeon maybe shouldn't end up in the roles they fell into because of small advantages and disadvantages at every one of the million steps that led them there. Actually achieving this on a societal level would require eliminating inequality, discrimination, and prejudice at so many levels of our economy, culture, and interpersonal interaction that it would likely lead to an enormous normalization of outcomes across our society, far beyond just getting a few more black or female billionaires. Equality of outcome (in the sense that even the lowest people in society can lead good lives and the highest aren't living in unimaginable opulence, not in the sense of everyone in the entire society earning the exact same income) and equality of opportunity tend to go together the same way inequality of outcome and inequality of opportunity do.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 21:10
|
|
|
Agreed but also it should be illegal to have a billion dollars
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 21:22
|
|
|
THC posted:Agreed but also it should be illegal to have a billion dollars 
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 21:24
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:I see your point, but I think you're oversimplifying when you say that opportunity is mostly exploitative. I'm considering opportunity in a much broader sense--i.e. not just the opportunity to become a billionaire CEO, but the opportunity to become that genius surgeon in the first place. There are so many steps between birth and becoming a surgeon that you can be a genius from day one but get derailed at one of a million points in your life due to disadvantages of your birth--poverty, racialization, gender, sexuality, etc., so that we don't end up with a society where the most skilled people become surgeons, we end up with one where the most skilled people who weren't derailed along the way through no fault of their own become surgeons, which is where the Jay Bee Pee "hierarchy of competence" breaks down. Yeah, and selling "social justice" framed this way often works on the right fairly well. Their worship of free markets can be turned around and used to support social justice when things like discrimination are framed as unfair disadvantages in our glorious meritocracy. Of course this only works on people who honestly believe capitalism is good because it's a pure meritocracy, regular ol' racists or sexists or what ever won't be swayed. A ton of people believe racism is over because there isn't a law on the books saying black people are not allowed to be a CEO, there's no law saying a woman or trans person can't become a CEO either. So, if we see groups under-represented it's just because they haven't proven their merit in our meritocracy, and making laws that send men with guns to force me to hire some first nations staff is oppression and market meddling. Only governments and laws can be bad, the market can't because it's based entirely on merit and rewarding those who take risks and work hard. The hardest part is often convincing people that systemic discrimination even exists, and then convincing them that systemic discrimination is harming the concept of the meritocracy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 21:38
|
|
|
I'm loving dying over here that Gilles Bisson said that "he served" when Dougie called the NDP military haters Bisson was a loving AIR CADET.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 21:42
|
|
|
lol. Still more service than Doug I bet he wasn't even in Scouts
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 21:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
vyelkin posted:I see your point, but I think you're oversimplifying when you say that opportunity is mostly exploitative. I'm considering opportunity in a much broader sense--i.e. not just the opportunity to become a billionaire CEO, but the opportunity to become that genius surgeon in the first place. There are so many steps between birth and becoming a surgeon that you can be a genius from day one but get derailed at one of a million points in your life due to disadvantages of your birth--poverty, racialization, gender, sexuality, etc., so that we don't end up with a society where the most skilled people become surgeons, we end up with one where the most skilled people who weren't derailed along the way through no fault of their own become surgeons, which is where the Jay Bee Pee "hierarchy of competence" breaks down. Yeah but then the old rich white doctor getting an award at the gala that I attended might not then have had all 5/5 of his children also become doctors and be pat on the back for such an accomplishment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2018 21:43
|
|