|
At absolute best IQ only measures one's rentention of education. It's never been a good measure of "intelligence", and frankly I doubt it could be with how "intelligence" is not a single well-defined concept or number.
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 05:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 10:29 |
|
|
polymathy posted:As far as I recall, I've never had a formal IQ test. Ahahahahahahahahahaha. Of course! Not only does he look like royalty, but also, he's intellectually gifted. Because of course he would be. I just... I seriously can't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 06:09
|
|
|
I literally got 100% on my year 6 science SAT so I'm basically stephen hawking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 06:11
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:I took the GRE and scored top 1% in verbal and top 2% in writing (quantitative was another story). With no humour whatsoever, I wanted to feel proud of myself but I mostly realised that the exam was utterly meaningless. The only time to ever bring them up or care about them at all is when someone else brags about their numbers like they're in any way important. When that happens, shove your numbers in their goddamn faces. All the GRE does is test how much test prep you could afford and how good you are at sitting in a chair for four hours. Though I say all that, but I kinda had fun with the GRE, stupid pointless tests can be amusing. EDIT: Oh, poo poo, I remember back in like 3rd grade, one of my essays for whatever the yearly standardized test was called got used as the example top-mark test the next year. It was hilarious, "wait, this sounds a bit familiar..." I think it was describing a dream I had? EDIT EDIT: Or I could be misremembering, whatever, this is stupid bullshit. Karia fucked around with this message at 06:17 on Feb 6, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 06:13
|
|
|
For the record, I have no idea what my IQ is, as I've never taken one of those tests, and our schools tested for different poo poo when I got my education. There you go, a free set-up for a snarky comback, JRod! Never say I don't give you anything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 06:20
|
|
|
Karia posted:The only time to ever bring them up or care about them at all is when someone else brags about their numbers like they're in any way important. When that happens, shove your numbers in their goddamn faces. All the GRE does is test how much test prep you could afford and how good you are at sitting in a chair for four hours. My preparation included two borrowed library books, one of which said flatly in the introduction that it was written to help people game the test as much as possible. It literally said that the book was not about conferring knowledge but about teaching the reader how the GRE worked and how best to exploit the meta-knowledge for a higher score.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 06:22
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:My preparation included two borrowed library books, one of which said flatly in the introduction that it was written to help people game the test as much as possible. It literally said that the book was not about conferring knowledge but about teaching the reader how the GRE worked and how best to exploit the meta-knowledge for a higher score. This is literally how everything works in late capitalism. Job finding when you don't have a nepotism network is about finding the right words to put in your resume so the crawler program doesn't discard it along with the other 2,000+ applicants for every single position. More or less literally everything about advertising. The system is broken by design and the key to success is to bypass as much of it as possible while the people who earnestly engage with it find it a stone wall.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 06:30
|
|
|
polymathy posted:As far as I recall, I've never had a formal IQ test. Neither did Tesla. Although I think the particulars of IQ as a form of measurement and what values it has are kind of a distraction from the fact that you brought it up (and defend its sanctity) as part of an argument why workers shouldn't have any say in their workplace because they're so dang stupid that they'll be incapable of understanding or seeing the value in the brilliant ideas of their boss. So I guess any suggestions the workers would have about making the workplace more comfortable, safer, or even more efficient must be shut down in the name of their brilliant techno-master. Except also bosses usually aren't the ones with much talent for coming up with new ideas, they're just the ones with social status to be in charge and the money to pay other people to come up with ideas for them, which is what Nikola Tesla actually was for most of his life.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 06:56
|
|
|
polymathy posted:I don't recall ever taking a formal IQ test, but I did take the SATs and what are the SATs besides a test that measures intelligence, or at least a certain type of intelligence? There is is. The single, stupidest thing you have ever said. Not since the days of UAE being among the most free countries have you said something so blatantly brain dead. What are the SATs besides a test that measure human intelligence. The SATs. The scholastic aptitude test. You scored in the 1300's, so you have to have a decent grasp of the english language, right? So what does the word scholastic mean? Just look at its root word if you need help, shouldn't be too har- IT IS A TEST THAT MEASURES EDUCATION YOU ABSURD BUFFOON People study for the SATs, you studied for the SATs, so you do have to understand that it can't be a test of general intelligence, but a test of education, of problem solving within a specific skill set of experience and knowledge gained from formal education. You don't think black people are inherently stupid right? Even though they aren't princeling geniuses like yourself. So how would you explain their inferior scores on the SAT? Could it be that the SAT doesn't so much test your intelligence as it does with family income: Family Income Level == Average SAT Score Less than $20,000 ====== 970 $40,001-$60,000 ====== 1070 $100,001-$140,000 ====== 1150 Over $200,000 ====== 1230 Weird.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 07:07
|
|
|
Caros posted:There is is. The single, stupidest thing you have ever said. Not since the days of UAE being among the most free countries have you said something so blatantly brain dead. No sorry, I still think "cambodia is a more powerful centralized state than new zealand and this is so obvious that i'm just stating this as a matter of course" is stupider.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 08:19
|
|
|
Caros posted:
 Why, that is weird. It also means that JRod's potentially outed his family's socio-economic status through sheer dumbassery, but then again, I'd expect nothing less at this point. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 08:39
|
|
|
A lot of people have said this already but for someone who doesn’t believe in empiricism you seem really into a lot of stuff from psychometrics 098 that you don’t understand at all jrod. I’m a huge dumb dumb, not to mention apostate, having committed the cardinal sin of working for the (gasp) government, but I’m sure a gifted intellect such as yourself will have no trouble getting up to speed. Please be sure to let me know what you find.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 08:53
|
|
|
polymathy posted:What do you mean by "assign IQ to third parties after the fact"?  What jrod's arguments boils down to. The smart should rule over the dumb masses. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 09:44
|
|
|
polymathy posted:Yeah, honestly I'm not going to spent 3 hours watching a YouTube video about The Bell Curve. I'm not surprised that you're unwilling to do research, JRode, even when it is provided directly to you and contextualised for why it is worth watching. You don't even need to read any difficult books and there's a nice british voice saying all of the difficult words and explaining the concepts! Too much work, though, especially for someone who already must be gifted because they got a 1300 on the SAT. Just like every other "gifted" kid, you can't risk challenging any of your underlying information because you're scared that it'll prove that having had a big vocabulary at age 12 doesn't actually mean poo poo in the real world.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 09:48
|
|
|
I got a 2370 on the SAT during that period where it was 3 sections, do I win? lol at the supposed "polymath" having lower academic performance than practically everyone else arguing against him Tarezax fucked around with this message at 10:53 on Feb 6, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 10:50
|
|
|
I scored good but kinda meh one round on the ACT, then after my family paid for a very good tutor because I was lucky and we could a afford stuff like that, scored near perfect on both when I took them again the next year. I must have become a libertarian ubermensch that summer or something, weird.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 10:56
|
|
|
If you're getting bored of Jrod, check out this dude for some big libertarian energy https://medium.com/swlh/good-luck-with-that-15-minimum-wage-grocery-store-workers-30dd6fb21664 One of the top comments is actually a pretty good if overly polite takedown.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 11:01
|
|
|
polymathy posted:If intelligence doesn't differ between people then there would be no reason for the SATs to exist and no reason to have any qualifications for admission to college whatsoever.  Karia posted:Wait... what? I distinctly remember a long conversation where you were trying to claim that while The Bell Curve may be offensive and distasteful, and the analysis of the science may be flawed, none of its basic scientific work had been disproven. Somehow you toxxed over this or something? Then when people pointed out that there were major scientific holes (IIRC, something to do with leaded gasoline?), you never acknowledged it, and threatened to do a chargeback if you got banned. Then you got banned.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 11:07
|
|
|
polymathy posted:But people are different and any just society will lead to unequal outcomes based on inherent, and benign, natural differences between individuals. So, I kinda do think people are differently competent, especially when we define competence as usefulness in jobs in a modern, complex society. That being said, I think it's an arbitrary way to value another human being. To me, highly competent people will succeed in just about any form of society- it's definitional to it. Bet it capitalism, communism, monarchy, whatever, we don't need to add on further rewards for this. Instead, I consider it much more important how society handles those that cannot easily work their way to the top, that is the epitome of what ethics is about to me. I don't really think they need further incentive, or to be given the absolutely arbitrary reward of private property, which can be held infinitely, transferred, inherited to the point where it simply is a base of power, rather than a reward for anything. The notion that the problem with society is that our best and brightest don't have enough power is really weird.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 11:43
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:If jrod and cingulate is the same poster (and they probably are) then he absolutely believes that the Bell Curve is correct. Regardless of sockpuppetry there's an awful lot of hedging going on in jrod's recent posts. He's not going to actually state actual praise for Charles Murray because he's not a total fool, but by the same token he's unwilling to actually denounce the man. And so on and so forth. The core of his belief system is ultimately monstrous but he can't bring himself to admit that. It is intensely craven.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 11:55
|
|
|
polymathy posted:For the extremely rare people who happen to have an IQ over 160, we should all want to utilize their talents for the benefit of society at large.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 14:54
|
|
|
I mean are we all just going to dunk on J-rod's scores now? I'm a big dum dum, who can't remember the word quiche and keeps having to describe it as an "egg stack pie", I keep farting in the shower and immediately regretting it and then thinking to myself "you regretted last time you farted in the shower too, how have you not learned your lesson yet?" and I got in the 98.4th percentile. I have physics, pure mathematics and mechanical engineering degrees and none of it means loving poo poo. I studied with a bunch of people who were a lot more capable than me in those fields but had lower scores than me in our high school scoring system because the system rewards people who are generally capable rather than specifically brilliant. It also massively biases for wealth and how good of a school you can go to due to scaling. Two of my friends have physics doctorates and work as physicists and are both utterly brilliant and scored considerably lower than I did, due to socioeconomic and testing factors. Did you know research shows that children who learn how to read from their parents prior to entering grade 1 will have an academic advantage over all others that not only never goes away but actually grows over the years? My mum was able to take time off from work because my dad made enough to teach me to read prior to my entry to school, meanwhile parents who are both working minimum wage jobs don't have those opportunities and therefore their kids never get those chances. But hey, your test scores don't correlate to your capability because they're wildly swingy based on the test, your circumstances and your preparation. There's some interesting research that showed being under financial strain crippled you ability to perform in testing. Which is a great little piece of evidence to slot into the "they're poor because they're less capable" when they're actually being crippled by financial stressors. Despite my roaring intellect I did a terrible job at university (shockingly, due to outside factors) but luckily I'm a white guy and my dad knew a guy at a company who got me a vacation work position. I worked very hard at that position and ended up with a career even after my contact left the company, but I never loving forgot that it wasn't loving merit that got me there, it was who I loving knew. In my entire life I have gotten exactly 1 job on merit. The other 6 jobs were based on who I knew. Connections I made at an elite university, what a loving shock. I got into that university because my parents had money to send me to a good school, which I excelled in because my mum had time to teach me to read and support my education when I was growing up. Nothing was due to some inherent superiority in me, and I'm no loving better than any other man on the street. It's almost like the whole system of assessing intelligence is actually assessing a bunch of other factors that aren't "intelligence" and you aren't better than anyone else just because those factors suited you better than they did others. But even if there were some mystical perfect measure of intelligence, some unbiased assessment of brainpower that everyone could take I still wouldn't want the smartest person running the show, I'd want the one who wanted to ensure that nobody ever dies of starvation, exposure or lack of healthcare. Tarezax posted:I got a 2370 on the SAT during that period where it was 3 sections, do I win? You're the smartest, you now rule the thread. My 132 IQ must bow before the might of your 147 IQ. How will you rule the thread wise overlord? My suggestion is from now on you're not allowed to disagree with anyone who has a higher IQ than you, as is the libertarian way. Of course the choice is yours, wouldn't want your inferior underlings dragging you down with a bunch of democratically made decisions. hooman fucked around with this message at 15:02 on Feb 6, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 14:54
|
|
|
Plebeians! Look upon my 35 ACT score and weep! My not having a doctorate and becoming unemployed has nothing to do with my parents being poor, it's because I'm innately inferior in some other way, probably some deficiency in work ethic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 17:11
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:You're describing loving fascism. How dare you accuse Jrod of supporting fascism when he has repeatedly said he hates fascism more than anybody? It's bad faith to judge someone by their actions and not their words. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 17:59
|
|
|
hooman posted:I mean are we all just going to dunk on J-rod's scores now? I had similar yet totally different experiences, if that makes any sense, but I don't want to write about them too much because it makes me so very depressed. I will say that, while I prepared for my A-levels until I had health problems yet had fantastic results, I took the SAT with no prep and scored a 1480 out of 1600. I guarantee that there were many, many people who tried much harder for less numbers. I will also admit that my brief military career was a result of nepotism - I was a good "knowledge worker" but a terrible soldier for a commissioned officer. I applied to two prestigious private universities in the US; one was Ivy League, and I was accepted to both. Having come from the last UK generation where uni was affordable, I was absolutely gobsmacked at the cost. My family wasn't poor, but I could hardly afford that... ironic that I didn't have enough inherent privilege to attend schools that are about elitism and inherent privilege. I ended up getting into four elite graduate programmes with the help of my department chair - clearly I am not a Randian superman because I needed help to "succeed". I then worked so hard that my health suffered and I was so exhausted, sick and nervous that I ignored the affections of an incredible woman and she married someone else. There's more gut-wrenching detail here, but suffice it to say that everyone thought that I was an idiot despite my 14-hour days. Apparently I needed to work harder. I then went out into the working world at the time of the Great Recession and have spent most of the last many years struggling to find work while drowning in inescapable debt. Clearly my exam scores just weren't good enough and I should have Randed harder.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 18:16
|
|
|
SpaceSDoorGunner posted:If you're getting bored of Jrod, check out this dude for some big libertarian energy Every grocery store I know attempted some kind of automation like the writer is talking about, and ended up keeping the staff on as "Lifeguards" assuming they didn't eventually end up smashing the machines with a hammer in the parking lot Office Space style. There are limits to automation. Robots aren't magical all knowing union-busters
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 19:32
|
|
|
when u definitely have worked in or even been to a grocery store and understand how people interact with technology. It is I, coder mc supermarketunderstander here to tell you how all the code I wrote will solve every problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 19:37
|
|
|
Did Jrod write this article? Libertarians are not selfish, pinky swear!
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 21:55
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 22:10
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:Did Jrod write this article? Can't be, it's too clear and concise and doesn't link to a single outside article
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 22:25
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Can't be, it's too clear and concise and doesn't link to a single outside article He's given up on that because doing even basic research is now too much work Watch the video JRod, it'll teach you what doing research means
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 22:32
|
|
|
You can't listen to a youtube video while you are hard at working burning pirate blurays.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 22:39
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Can't be, it's too clear and concise and doesn't link to a single outside article That might be giving the article itself a bit too much credit. I mean it has such gems as quote:If the redistribution of wealth (to any degree) cannot force poverty out of existence, then why is it so difficult to believe an approach in the opposite direction is a viable alternative? Isn't this an inherently flawed premise? The author assumes giving people money/property won't fix their poverty, so by that logic taking away rich people's money/property won't make others better off either. But I'm pretty sure this is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 22:42
|
|
|
I mean yes if you take away all of people's wealth to the point that they die then they will not be impoverished any more, much in the same manner that feeding people to any degree cannot eliminate hunger, therefore we must starve them to death so that they are not hungry any more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 22:47
|
|
|
Also ignoring the fact that many advanced countries in many cases have an overabundance of certain vital commodities and resources, yet many people who lack them. That's a systemic failure that cannot be brought up because it would make market economies and capitalism look bad. The other one that they always bring up as well is the whole "welfare makes people dependent" argument, and that taking that away will somehow make it better in the same way that the best way to help a paraplegic is to take away their wheelchair. In addition to the above, it ignores the depredations of private ownership of the means of production and the decreasing need for labour in general. In any sane society, when the need for labour dropped everyone would just work less and have more free time, but that's anathema to the current social order for multiple reasons. In the end, though, it's essentially a dog-whistle argument for "I do not want any of my money to go to the disadvantaged", therefore we must deregulate everything to create jobs that don't exist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 23:20
|
|
|
“It is possible that in the past decade no country has moved further toward a libertarian society than South Africa has. Yes—South Africa.” https://www.unz.com/print/Reason-1980dec-00061/?View=PDF Yup. that is Reason Magazine, in TYOOL 1980, doing the Jrod thing and picking a sclerotic tyrannical aardvark of a country and annointing it with the title of Most Freest Evar! As so many good posts here have noted, libertarian poobahs and publications have a remarkably easy time in condoning and cheering for any despot, as long as they promise that not one red cent will be spent on improving the lives of the plebs. We have seen Hans Herman Hoppe advocate for the world as a tapestry of insane micro-fiefdoms that can kick you out (or kill you) if you change your mind on their munificence. We were wowed at the many ways praxeology can be used to make one immune to ever acknowledge being wrong. But if you listen to the modern crop of libertarians, they will say proudly that they have always stood for the purest form of liberty, and act offended if you mistake them for dog-whistling ol' conservatives. Racism, as they will readily tell you, if an offshoot of statism. Even if a café owner just decides one day to hang a sign on his business saying POC should just keep walking, the colelctivist hand of the Government must sirely be at hand somehow! And hey, the KKK was composed of DEMOCRATS, who are and have always been socialists. QED! But yeah, point at Jim Crows Laws, at Bull Connor or the mormon Church not allowing black clerics until the 70s, and they will shrug and say they have nothing to do with that. Bring up Ron Paul's infinitely bigoted newsletters, and they will say he had nothing to do with it and that those articles were just random word salad that somehow fell into the printbox. Reason magazine was not so shy. Even when cartoonish racism was quickly becoming the enemy du jour on television specials, they went to bat for the world's premier apartheid state (let's leave the Israel can of worms closed for the moment). not without some wringing of hands. Libertarians have always been good at aping at least the semblance of decency. "It's not that we don't WANT everyone to have healthcare! We just don't believe your way will work, even when it works in so many places! I lose sleep every night thinking of people unable to get their carpal tunnel surgery, I swear!" “I regret the fact that honest, law-abiding blacks cannot own property in or near white cities, but I realize that without this restriction separate development will fail — and with it the capitalist system in South Africa.” https://www.unz.com/print/Reason-1977apr-00038/?View=PDF See, black folks would just have to take one for the team this century. Once the levels of Liberty finally reach critical mass for white people, the freedom explosion will benefit all (above a certain IQ level, that is)! Aaaany day now! Remember Dr. King's famous prison letter on the virtues of setting timetables for the liberty of the oppressed! Did you know he was a libertarian? Until next week, when we gain more by saying he was a communist, I mean. Hell, even earlier on, when Sout Africa was emulating some of loving STALIN's most devastating policies and relocating entire populations to hellholes to be "developed" while granting their digs to more deserving groups? You'd only find dry eyes and approving nods at Reason. “The major black ethnic groups lumped together under the general term 'Bantu' are as distinct from one another as Germany and France. They are largely illiterate, largely uncaring, mutually mistrustful, mutually antagonistic. They are not the great single black mass yearning to be free that sentimentalists and self-servers in other lands try to portray them.” https://www.unz.com/print/Reason-1973dec-00026/?View=PDF See, Bantu are not even really a people! Just a passel of uncivilized wogs. They are too dumb to even want precious, precious Freedom(tm)! That one is particularly cruel. They all but admit that yeah, several of these factions despise each other and being stuck in an abandoned, impoverished mega-gulag is likely going to have them stabbing at each other, but, um, it's their fault for not being a single unified culture! They didn't always keep it so high-minded and abstract, though. In 1976, when the country was boilingand on the verge of a series of police massacres od protesters (who must have sure have violated the NAP), their correspondent put it in casual, clear terms. Whites are smarter and get freedom. Blacks are socialists. End of the conversation. “Let the people who advocate immediate majority rule in South Africa and Rhodesia take note. It would be very nice to have a minimal libertarian government and that is what South African libertarians would like to achieve. But as long as the choice is between being governed by a relatively informed white minority and a Socialist black majority, ‘apartheid’ in South Africa will stay.” https://www.unz.com/print/Reason-1976may-00032/?View=PDF The quote marks around apartheid are a lovely touch. Just a chef's kiss of showing your whole rear end. You fuckers think freedom of the press and the right to a fair trial makes for a free country? You dipshits. If you can't set an ethnicity aside as criminal, we are ALL slaves!  It hasn't really changed that much, either. Sure, South Africa failed and libertarians have nothing but contempt for losers, unless they are Confederate generals. But flip through a newer edition of Readon or any similar publication, and you will always find a deflection on how the -real- abuse is not redlining in black neighborhoods, but some other hobgoblin like public schools. There is no coincidence that so many of their thought-leaders (gag) like Stefan Molyneaux have slid very comfortably from high-minded thinkers to overt ethnocentrist cranks, along with most of their following. It's a double boon to them; an undtermench that they can feel superior to, and an excuse as to why free-market projects don't bring utopias. If only South Africa had no black people, it would be called Galtgulchia now, and the orbital elevator would be humming along day and night!
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2021 23:35
|
|
|
Sephyr posted:“I regret the fact that honest, law-abiding blacks cannot own property in or near white cities, but I realize that without this restriction separate development will fail — and with it the capitalist system in South Africa.” https://www.unz.com/print/Reason-1977apr-00038/?View=PDF This sounds suspiciously similar to Soviet and CCP ideas about The New Man. We just have to suppress this ethnic and/or religious group we decided represents The Old World and when they aren't around anymore we'll achieve a utopia. When a libertarian says it in 1980 when the wounds of those policies were still raw, it sounds even dumber. DarklyDreaming fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Feb 7, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 00:14
|
|
|
polymathy posted:As far as I recall, I've never had a formal IQ test. This is loving hilarious. Hey Jrod, I'm higher on the IQ hierarchy than you according to my test scores, so I order you to stop believing libertarian bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 02:37
|
|
|
JustJeff88 posted:I had similar yet totally different experiences, if that makes any sense, but I don't want to write about them too much because it makes me so very depressed. I will say that, while I prepared for my A-levels until I had health problems yet had fantastic results, I took the SAT with no prep and scored a 1480 out of 1600. I guarantee that there were many, many people who tried much harder for less numbers. I will also admit that my brief military career was a result of nepotism - I was a good "knowledge worker" but a terrible soldier for a commissioned officer. I applied to two prestigious private universities in the US; one was Ivy League, and I was accepted to both. Having come from the last UK generation where uni was affordable, I was absolutely gobsmacked at the cost. My family wasn't poor, but I could hardly afford that... ironic that I didn't have enough inherent privilege to attend schools that are about elitism and inherent privilege. I'm sorry for your experiences, that sucks my goon. This is the whole loving rub isn't it with libertarianism, they assume that the smartest and hardest working will naturally rise to the top when in fact it's always going to be the currently richest and most priviledged because without that massive defence network of wealth and priviledge all it takes is one bad break, one bad day, one poorly timed illness, one loving thing to entirely derail your life. It's not bad luck that these people who are oh so enamored with their own *sparkling* intellect, it must be that dumb people are holding them back, not the system itself is was built by the wealthy to ensure they stayed that way and that libertarianism is taking that system and turning it up to 11. Verus posted:This is loving hilarious. Hey Jrod, I'm higher on the IQ hierarchy than you according to my test scores, so I order you to stop believing libertarian bullshit. God it's so funny, J-rod you really should have ignored that IQ question, like you do so many others, rather than outing yourself as, by your own measure, the dumbest person in the room.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 03:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 10:29 |
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Libertarians think businesses work basically like the heroes in Atlas Shrugged. I don't know of any libertarians who think the way you describe. To the contrary, businessmen can be very dangerous people. Libertarians don't caricature the rich as pure good or pure evil. This sort of simple-minding thinking, i.e. reducing complex things into cartoonish caricatures, seems to be a Leftist hallmark. There are two ways a person can become wealthy. The first is the economic means, i.e. peaceful production and free exchange. And the second is the political means, i.e. bribing politicians, using force and violence and otherwise gaming the system for their benefit. Libertarians support the first and reject the second. We also recognize that businessmen would usually inevitably like to game the system in their favor. But the way to combat this is through market regulation, not State regulation. The way to combat it is through political decentralization, common law, courts and institutions of Civil Society. We want to keep the entrepreneurial-minded people using the economic means, which is socially valuable and away from the political means, which is socially destructive. The trouble with your thinking is that you cannot recognize entrepreneurship as a socially useful and important role, even in the absence of cronyism and monopolization. There is no perfect system, no Utopia. It's not enough to point out potential shortcomings in one proposed system without demonstrating that an alternative will be better. Businessmen are often made up of immoral people, but this doesn't distinguish them from people in government, among unions, or virtually any other social group. People are very flawed and the best we can hope for is a system that at least incentivizes peaceful and productive behavior that is socially beneficial.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 03:59
|
|