Randomness thread, part two.

[oskar]

In other words: the education system knows exactly what it's doing.

[spoonitnow]

In other words: the education system knows exactly what it's doing.

Ding ding ding again.

[spoonitnow]

Just as a warning, I already know this is going to be kind of a long rant, so bear with me.

TL;DR: It details why I haven't identified as "red pill" for years, even though I advocate for using the theory that has been developed to your advantage. It also points out the only person's shit (Athol Kay, Google "MMSL" to find him) who I would recommend reading and learning from if you want to get better with women, relationships and taking better care of yourself without feeling like you have to apologize for it or abuse people in the process.

So for the handful of people who like to hear what I have to say about the "red pill" community, there was a recent "controversy" where a well-known blogger/writer/figurehead basically manufactured a huge amount of [baseless] negative press for himself in a really, really skillful way. Unfortunately, he also outed himself as not giving a shit about the people he used to seem to give a shit about helping, preferring to care more about making money off of his books and other shit he sells, and pretty clearly hurt the community as a whole. If you saw anything about the "pro-rape rallies" ordeal, which was debunked on Snopes fwiw, then that's what I'm talking about.

Anyway, I bring this up here because it's like the third or fourth time it's happened in the past couple of years where someone who helped a lot of people figured out they could bastardize what they were doing and make a ton of money in the process (like the shithead posting the videos that made it look like he was walking up choking random girls). This type of shit (and related circlejerks of their no-critical-thinking-having followers) is why the "red pill" situation as a whole is completely and totally hopeless at this point.

The "red pill" thing really encompasses a lot of different groups that sometimes have wildly different opinions on how things should be handled, but what they all hold in common is the core set of premises that they have about the biological and psychological differences between men and women.

To give an example of how wildly the differences can go between groups, one end of the spectrum has the MGTOW types that completely opt out of dating/courting/dealing with women (though they do not identify as homosexual or bisexual) and focus only improving themselves and what will make them happy.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, you could have the PUA-focused types who have the same mindset towards improving themselves, but a lot of it centers around building the skills for seducing a certain subset of women (who are pre-selected to be more likely to be ovulating) and maintaining a rotating series of usually 2-5 girls in a "soft harem" type of arrangement based around that.

You've also got the married guys who just want to fix their dead bedroom and have the happy life with their family that they were told they would have if they "played by the rules" or whatever. There are the women who have become disillusioned with feminism and who have turned to TRP to become more feminine women who can pull as high of a quality man as they can before it's too late.

Anyway, there are a lot of different groups with a lot of different objectives, but they all start with a handful of fundamental assumptions and then go from there. Those assumptions are broken down, scrutinized and studied critically to develop red pill theory in a number of different directions. When assumptions are found to be incomplete or outright wrong for one reason or another, the theory adjusts, much like well-developed theory in any other discipline. While it's obviously not an exact science (and social science is an oxymoron), there's a lot that goes into it.

So what we get to is that there is a stark contrast between the basic theory and the extreme direction that some of the RP groups have taken it. For example, some people have tried to use it to build a white nationalist narrative, and others have used it to cash in on guys desperate to learn how to have more success with women.

Others yet, like Athol Kay (the only name I'll drop here) have used it to develop an effective approach to help men who are relationship-minded to get a high-quality woman, keep himself happy, keep her happy and keep the relationship healthy without going off on some psycho shit. He's also never sacrificed the quality or effectiveness of the material to make a quick buck, and he's by far the most legitimate option for people who want to learn the tools without going off the deep end by following someone with some other agenda.

Speaking of Athol Kay, the guy's wife was fired from a pretty good job because of his blog posts and the things he teaches a few years ago. Know why? Because he more or less got lumped in with a bunch of dumbasses, who actually tend to reject his viewpoints on things, because they both talked about the things that are fundamental to an understanding of the body of theory that's called "red pill." There's a happy ending to that story, however, because she joined him in his business, and they now make a really good living helping people without trying to fuck them out of their money.

I'm not associated with, affiliated with, or have otherwise ever had a conversation with the guy, but if you want to read up on the guy, just Google "MMSL" without the quotes.

With all of that having been said, there's a lot the shit can offer a lot of people from a lot of different walks of life, but nobody's ever going to give a fuck because now the whole world thinks that it's just a bunch of pissed off guys who live in their mom's basements who want to legalize rape because some guy figured out he could pull a media stunt and sell some books.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I have to say that my first impression of this situation was that some guys just need to grow up.

Then I thought about it.

I realize that my own concept of sexuality and its various uses and expressions is practically zero. While I have been exposed to a fair amount of interesting ... material ... in this area, I'm not an explorer. I would be remiss to claim any modicum of expertise in socio-sexual aspects of being a person.

Furthermore, if you're unhappy in your life and you are willing to change your behavior to affect the situation, then I am at least a little bit inspired by you.

So, while I'll be sticking firmly to the one gal that I've got, I respect that if we hadn't found each other, I could have very different thoughts on my situation. I don't see myself ever juggling multiple women, but that's mostly because I am overly quick to fall in love and irrationally devoted to people who have clearly been giving me warning signals.

So my only real argument against OPP is that I would be bad at it. So long as people are honest about why they're together, then I don't see a problem.

I mean... if you're gonna play the game, at least respect that not everyone's playing.

[spoonitnow]

I have a few short comments.

For the sake of clarity, let's define studying game as learning applied charisma, particularly for people who do not have it naturally, and learning to manage relationships of all kinds in a way that keeps everyone engaged and interested.

So, while I'll be sticking firmly to the one gal that I've got

That's what most men who study game want. The whole point of learning game in the first place is to be able to get to that point for them. That's what I wanted when I got into it myself; I didn't actively seek out another girl.

...I am overly quick to fall in love and irrationally devoted to people who have clearly been giving me warning signals.

A big part of game, especially in the context of relationships (all types of relationships, not just romantic/sexual), is learning the skills to where you can be extremely devoted without being taken advantage of.

So my only real argument against OPP is that I would be bad at it.

The original PUAs (a minority subset of "red pillers" who are focused primarily on learning to pick up women) were guys who all knew they were bad at it and just put time into figuring out what worked and what didn't while sharing their experiences. Originally, it was entirely built by guys who were extremely socially awkward and had no natural charisma, completely on their own, figuring out things as they went.

It's worth noting that this history isn't actively maintained in today's "red pill" communities, and it's kind of a shame.

I mean... if you're gonna play the game, at least respect that not everyone's playing.

In the "red pill" framework, one premise is that all of humanity and the interactions between people is a game, and you're hopelessly trapped in it whether you want to be or not. A good analogy is that in chess, even if you're a king, you're still bound to the board.

That can sound somewhat depressing until you learn its sister premise: You get to determine what the objectives of the game are for yourself. The "red pill" ideology is largely about (as much as I hate this next word) empowering people to determine those objectives themselves instead of basing them off of what other people have decided for them.

Just to give an example that might be a little counter-intuitive, imagine a group of guys all trying to go out and bang as many attractive women as possible. Someone in that group who decides they just want to stick to one girl might feel the influence of his peers and feel fucked up over it. The "red pill" ideology prepares that person to deal with setting his own goals in the game (ie: the one girl) instead of just trying to bang a bunch of girls because he's been told that's what he's supposed to do.

[wufwugy]

After reading these posts I feel so EMPOWERED.

[rong]

Spoon, link me to a beginners guide to this shit. Googled mmsl but most of its trying to sell me books and forum is full of a ton of shit I don't understand.

[spoonitnow]

Spoon, link me to a beginners guide to this shit. Googled mmsl but most of its trying to sell me books and forum is full of a ton of shit I don't understand.

Yeah his site has been in the middle of being revamped for like several months. I haven't checked there in quite a while, but goddamn does he need to organize that shit.

Here's a great starting point: What is the Red Pill?

The Blue Pill is the lie. The Blue Pill is the avalanche of marriage and dating advice that’s out there. There’s been books, movies, magazines, TV shows, seminars and sermons telling you how relationships should be. There’s what your parents brought you up to believe, what your friends told you and what she said she wanted to be happy. There’s been over fifty years of professional help from doctors, psychologists, counselors, teachers, ministers and more……and the divorce rate has never been higher. The advice is that bad.

The Blue Pill is what women *say* they want from a man. You’ve been fed the Blue Pill from birth and you’ve never had a proper chance to win at love because you’ve been told the lie about how the game is played.

The Red Pill is the truth.

I do have one word of warning about all this… you can’t unlearn the truth. Some of it is going to sting.

Once you take the Red Pill you’ll know exactly what women really want from men. Your life will change forever as you see the true nature of how men and women interact and everything will look almost scripted. The good news is that once you know the tune, the dance is easy to do.

There are a handful of links at the bottom of that brief explanation. I suggest reading these two first, and they're both very brief and information-dense:

Alpha and Beta Traits: http://marriedmansexlife.com/take-th...a-male-traits/ (the science/hormones involved in each)
Nice Guys and Betaization: http://marriedmansexlife.com/take-th...d-betaization/ (explains the friend zone and why sex dies out in a lot of long-term relationships)

Also, please for the love of god anyone reading this, avoid theredpill subreddit *at first* because it's extreeeemely geared towards the pure PUA approach that's all about pump and dumping as many women as possible. Read at https://www.reddit.com/r/marriedredpill (start with the links in the sidebar) for more related to relationship game instead.

Note: It's not that the PUA skill set is bad, but it's not the most direct route for learning to handle women for relationships inside this framework.

Another perspective is The Rational Male, which is the single blog that I would recommend the most for people who are just wanting to read about the "red pill" stuff in a more general sense. His writing is interested in general. Here's a good explanation of why someone would bother to write about this stuff and try to reach men: http://therationalmale.com/2011/10/2...-your-problem/

Ian Ironwood's Red Pill Room blog is my personal favorite, and he has a writing style that I think everyone here would really enjoy a lot because it really fits into the introvert/nerd/people who would tend to like poker demographic. He also had a female teacher try to groom and prey on his young son and went through a shitload of legal stuff over that, and he works in porn (not as a performer) and has never had an issue over it in his marriage. His description of multiple types of alpha will probably be an eye-opener for people who think it's a one size fits all type of situation.

I have my own examples along these lines. One example is a long-standing FTR member who came to me for help because his druggie girlfriend stabbed him on Christmas because his brother proposed as a Christmas present, and the FTR'er *only* got the druggie bitch a necklace that was worth ~$500 (if I remember correctly). This FTR member came very close to being killed by some shitheads she was running with at the time. Another FTR example is someone who came to me because he wasn't sure if he should leave a woman and disappear because he was unhappy with life because she wants kids soon and he doesn't, and he "jokingly" mentioned offing himself as a potential solution.

Anyway that's all I have to say about that since I've hijacked this thread enough as it is.

[JKDS]

Good info, game theory applied to relationships is awesome.

Does it account for differences in women tho? Like the differences between the shy nerd girl who likes to read about real number theory before bed and the one who is completely obsessed with cosmo advice and such?

[spoonitnow]

Good info, game theory applied to relationships is awesome.

Does it account for differences in women tho? Like the differences between the shy nerd girl who likes to read about real number theory before bed and the one who is completely obsessed with cosmo advice and such?

Absolutely. Understand that all it does is start with a handful of basic premises and turns you loose to form logical solutions based on all kinds of different situations. It doesn't assume that all men are the same and that all women are the same, only that there are basic principles that underlie all interactions (ie: most women and most men will respond to certain situations in similar ways most of the time, but recognizing the nuances and exceptions are huge).

Also see the Alternative Red Pill subreddit for the "red pill" concepts applied to gay men and other types of "alternative" lifestyles. There's even a recent post that's a primer for applying red pill concepts to transsexual women.

There's also a group of women who use the same principles to try to pull men who will be good husbands/providers/fathers/etc. It's worth noting that they often actively avoid men who are PUA types because this doesn't fit into what they want.


But anyway, I've posted a lot about this shit in the past few posts, so if anyone wants to know anything else, just use Google or the links I've given in this because I don't want to keep clogging up this thread with this stuff.

[JKDS]

Thanks, good post. Now one more thing...

Jk.

In other news, don't ever DUI in arizona. I translated az's rules, and found out that defendants get boned. Not only are there large 4 figure fines, but prosecutors are forbidden from pleaing down to avoid em. That's in addition to having an ignition interlock device for a year. (Again, nonnegotiable).

I don't think anyone is visiting az anytime soon, but it's a fun fact.

[chardrian]

Thanks, good post. Now one more thing...

Jk.

In other news, don't ever DUI in arizona. I translated az's rules, and found out that defendants get boned. Not only are there large 4 figure fines, but prosecutors are forbidden from pleaing down to avoid em. That's in addition to having an ignition interlock device for a year. (Again, nonnegotiable).

I don't think anyone is visiting az anytime soon, but it's a fun fact.

yeah but in Alaska you can get a DUI without even driving. If the keys are in the ignition and you are sleeping it off, you are still operating your vehicle even if the car is in park.

[rong]

The rational male stuff is good. Accessible and organised. It's interesting stuff. I don't see a downside to understanding this perspective, and although it's mostly aimed at the couples dynamic, a lot of it is applicable for all types of relationship.

[wufwugy]

I bookmarked some of this stuff. I still haven't gotten around to reading the last thing Spoon recommended on the subject when I asked, but I have it marked for later. The relationship aspect is not something I'm focused on now (I've gotten by on intuition well enough), and the self-improvement aspect is something that I know I would discard at this point in my life. I do intend to devour at some later date. Even with strong intuition on the subject, there is a lot that can be learned through a categorical and dissecting approach, which I have not done.

[OngBonga]

yeah but in Alaska you can get a DUI without even driving. If the keys are in the ignition and you are sleeping it off, you are still operating your vehicle even if the car is in park.

Same here in the UK. The law is really not very clear in this regard. For example...

Q... What if I was in my car on my driveway having a cigarette trying to keep warm and I had no intention of driving?

A... There is no need for the prosecution to prove that a person was likely to drive whilst unfit or over the limit. It is for the Defendant to prove that there is no prospect of using the vehicle.

This is not consistent with UK law. Normally, it is for the prosecution to prove guilt, not for the defendant to prove innocence. And you don't even need to have the keys in the ignition. So long as the police deem you to "be in control of the car", then you can be prosecuted.

Of course, these laws are fucked up. If you decide to drive to the pub, leaving your coat inside the car, then after a few drinks, you decide to walk home, you could in theory be arrested for retrieving your coat from the car, and you now have to prove in court that you had no intention of driving, which of course is near impossible to prove.

Fuck law.

[rong]

Some really good stuff here about Russian culture and how they view the west.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/c..._donald_trump/

[spoonitnow]

So I got to have the minimum wage conversation with Queen Spoon and Princess Spoon yesterday. That was interesting without being surprising, I guess. I'll share my thoughts on that conversation in case it helps anyone in spreading the good word.

Princess Spoon (whose stripper name is Lola) is pretty receptive because she's gotten pretty used to the idea that she was a teenager less than a year ago and that she doesn't know shit about shit, so she's in this really interesting phase where she's just soaking up all of this knowledge. And to be fair, she really doesn't know shit about shit, but she also doesn't try to act like she does.

Queen Spoon (whose stripper name is Ginger), on the other hand, is on into her mid-20s, and she's had the influence of a bunch of other people bitching about how Bernie Sanders is the best thing since sliced bread and how a $15/hour minimum wage would just be amazing for everyone. She's receptive, but she's a bit skeptical, which is fine.

I don't go into these types of things trying to change someone's mind or convince them of something. Instead, I approach it along the lines of giving them information and simple arguments that will get them to thinking in the right direction. I used three lines of thought, since I think that any more than will just be too much new information at one time. For example:

Line of Thought #1

A. Does increasing minimum wage increase or decrease the number of jobs available?

They both thought about it for a moment and answered that it decreases the number of jobs available.

B. So with that having been said, you agree that decreasing the minimum wage increases the number of jobs available?

Again, they both thought about it for a moment and answered yes.

C. And now we see how unemployment is affected by the minimum wage.

And then I saw the light bulbs turn on.

Line of Thought #2

A. Do you think lowering minimum wage allows people to be exploited?

They both answered yes without thinking about it at all -- I pointed out how quickly they answered this compared to how they thought about my previous questions before continuing.

B. If an adult agrees to rake the leaves in my yard for free, is he being exploited?

They both immediately answered no.

C. If that same adult agrees to rake the leaves in my yard for $1.00/hour, is he being exploited?

And then I saw the light bulbs turn on.

Line of Thought #3

Note: For a frame of reference, they both know that I write for people on the Internet as a profession and that I have clients on six continents, etc., just because that's the nature of the Internet.

A. There's no minimum wage for hiring people on the Internet. Does that mean I'm getting exploited?

They both agree I'm not.

B. But if there's no minimum wage, then why would anyone pay me more than peanuts?

They say because my work is worth it.

C. Do you think I'm the only person in the world who would be paid more than the current minimum wage if the minimum wage was abolished?

And then I saw the light bulbs turn on.

[OngBonga]

If forming an orderly queue is a very British thing to do, then what the fuck do the rest of the world do when lots of people need the same service at the same time?

[spoonitnow]

Some really good stuff here about Russian culture and how they view the west.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/c..._donald_trump/

That reminds me a lot of the way that the men I grew up with viewed pretty much everyone else.

[OngBonga]

I think the first point about minimum wage is the really powerful argument. If companies are forced to pay workers more, then they employ less. That should be obvious to anyone who has even the slightest idea about how business works.

It's nothing more than a vote grab. Stupid people on low wages think that voting for someone who wants to increase the minimum wage will make them richer. It won't. It will put in power someone who is adept at exploiting stupid people.

[Chelle]

The idea that raising minimum wage will improve things appears to be a good idea at first - but, that could have a backlash of people not pushing themselves to improve their living circumstances. Clearly people don't want to remain at a low-income area, so most of the time 'RAISE DE WAGES' is going to be appealing.

Could this have a positive effect on the economy? More people having more money means more people buying shiny new things, right? Feeding the 'system' so to say.

Could the 'raise the wages' idea also just be an idea to improve some people's living situation? Are there some situations that the wage change not improve (likely).

I can see both sides of how it /may/ improve things, and how it can also deeply hinder some people from pushing themselves into situations where they can improve things themselves.

In other news - there's going to be a bunch of discount chocolate Monday because of the Hallmark holiday Sunday. Did I sell into it? Yes, I did. Will I buy chocolate Monday? . . .possibly. I know for damn sure I'mma be watching Deadpool this weekend, though.

[wufwugy]

WTF is going on? Ong has said two correct things in two days back to back?

[wufwugy]

Could this have a positive effect on the economy? More people having more money means more people buying shiny new things, right? Feeding the 'system' so to say.

If minimum wage increased real income, economic laws would break. It would mean that the way to produce more wealth is to spend more wealth, so we would all just try to spend as much as we could so we would be as rich as we could be. Clearly, things don't work this way. It's akin to trying to conserve your car's gas by using more gas.

Minimum wage reduces incomes by reducing the demand for labor, which in turn reduces supply of goods and services, which makes for less income than otherwise. The best result a minimum wage can have is to be totally offset by a matching inflation in prices of goods and services, which would make the minimum wage neutral instead of negative for the time being. Even then, minimum wage still suppresses supply over longer periods.

Could the 'raise the wages' idea also just be an idea to improve some people's living situation? Are there some situations that the wage change not improve (likely).

That's the idea as held by many non-economists. It doesn't work.

[Chelle]

If minimum wage increased real income, economic laws would break. It would mean that the way to produce more wealth is to spend more wealth, so we would all just try to spend as much as we could so we would be as rich as we could be. Clearly, things don't work this way. It's akin to trying to conserve your car's gas by using more gas.

Minimum wage reduces incomes by reducing the demand for labor, which in turn reduces supply of goods and services, which makes for less income than otherwise. The best result a minimum wage can have is to be totally offset by a matching inflation in prices of goods and services, which would make the minimum wage neutral instead of negative for the time being. Even then, minimum wage still suppresses supply over longer periods.

Agreed.

I, still, am on a fence about it. Mostly because it's a 'pretty' idea. Though, knowing the strong likelihood of raising the minimum wages turning into a negative situation it is likely an idea that is only a pretty package.

I'm ridiculous in wanting people to succeed, while keeping in mind they must want to do so. Some people do not have the want to.

side note: I always see many sides to one thing, there's no stark white and black, but many shades of gray between those two. Obviously when several people look at one idea, they all are going to have different opinions, and then their own ideas about the base idea. Does that mean that one person is 'right' or one person is 'wrong'? Not completely. Mostly because we have our own idea of reality of how things 'work'. I'm completely off the original topic, apologies, that's how my brain works.

[wufwugy]

I, still, am on a fence about it. Mostly because it's a 'pretty' idea.

You know what I think is a pretty idea? That people with no incomes and low skills can more readily acquire incomes and skills when there is no minimum wage. Another pretty idea: people with incomes can acquire more and unique goods and services by there being no minimum wage.

Some things only look pretty when they are viewed through the misunderstanding lens.

[Chelle]

You know what I think is a pretty idea? That people with no incomes and low skills can more readily acquire incomes and skills when there is no minimum wage. Another pretty idea: people with incomes can acquire more and unique goods and services by there being no minimum wage.

Some things only look pretty when they are viewed through the misunderstanding lens.

I can agree with that. I don't say at all that I completely understand things. In one of the first few things I said on my first post on the topic was, "but, that could have a backlash of people not pushing themselves to improve their living circumstances". For me, if someone flipping burgers was given 15 bucks to do so, would they be as driven to improve? In most cases, no, they wouldn't.

I'm conflicted in many different areas, as I know that the community culture one is raised can limit a person's idea of their own abilities. Does that make it okay that they're all about working 'little' and expecting a lot? Eh, not completely. But, then on the whole I know my opinion of things doesn't mean that it's 'right' or 'wrong'.

[a500lbgorilla]

I picked up a little book recently, some essays written by a husband and wife team of historians. The Lessons of History by Will & Ariel Durant. All the essays have the theme -and History - Biology and History, Race and History, Character and History, Morals and History, Religion and History, Economics and History, Socialism and History, Government and History, History and War.

Well in Economics and History, they make the point that time and again the pattern holds that when all other devices are held dormant, wealth always concentrates. That "In progressive societies the concentration may reach a point where the strength of number in the many poor rivals the strength of ability in the few rich, then the unstable equilibrium generates a critical situation, which history has diversely met by legislation redistributing wealth or by revolution distributing poverty." They go on to dink off examples from Greece and Rome, to Rome and France, and, oh yeah, the US from 1933-52 and again in 1960-65.

Now, we live in an age where the ability of the few rich is incredible and still we're well ready for some mechanism to redistribute the wealth of the nation for a spell before we fall back and watch the mechanisms of economic competition see all the wealth whisked back to a concentrated few.

Is that mechanism some crazy minimum wage? I think that's a part and I'd welcome a lot more.

PS

If minimum wage increased real income, economic laws would break.

:^)

[wufwugy]

I picked up a little book recently, some essays written by a husband and wife team of historians. The Lessons of History by Will & Ariel Durant. All the essays have the theme -and History - Biology and History, Race and History, Character and History, Morals and History, Religion and History, Economics and History, Socialism and History, Government and History, History and War.

Well in Economics and History, they make the point that time and again the pattern holds that when all other devices are held dormant, wealth always concentrates. That "In progressive societies the concentration may reach a point where the strength of number in the many poor rivals the strength of ability in the few rich, then the unstable equilibrium generates a critical situation, which history has diversely met by legislation redistributing wealth or by revolution distributing poverty." They go on to dink off examples from Greece and Rome, to Rome and France, and, oh yeah, the US from 1933-52 and again in 1960-65.

Now, we live in an age where the ability of the few rich is incredible and still we're well ready for some mechanism to redistribute the wealth of the nation for a spell before we fall back and watch the mechanisms of economic competition see all the wealth whisked back to a concentrated few.

Is that mechanism some crazy minimum wage? I think that's a part and I'd welcome a lot more.

PS



:^)

Your post surprises me. I'm assuming I missed the point you were making.

[a500lbgorilla]

Check out the embedded quote.

"In progressive societies the concentration may reach a point where the strength of number in the many poor rivals the strength of ability in the few rich, then the unstable equilibrium generates a critical situation, which history has diversely met by legislation redistributing wealth or by revolution distributing poverty."

I've come across a lot of great points the Durants have made and I wanted share one that fell right on top of the min wage discussion.

If not minimum wage, your eye better be on the right prize - redistributing wealth.

[wufwugy]

The quote doesn't claim a cause of the mechanisms behind the natural flow of wealth concentrates or dispersion.

Minimum wage doesn't redistribute wealth to the poor. It burns wealth and has a positive proportional effect on the rich even as it reduces their wealth (because it reduces the wealth of the non-rich by a greater proportion).

[a500lbgorilla]

"Since practical ability differs from person to person, the majority of such abilities, in nearly all societies, is gathered in a minority of men. The concentration of wealth is a natural result of this concentration of ability, and regularly recurs in history. The rate of concentration varies (other factors being equal) with the economic freedom permitted by morals and laws."

Great book. Published 1968.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Can we just put wuf in charge of all the economics, please?

I think he's completely off his rocker, but at least he's studying the field and more likely to be right about these things than me (on paper).

I'm perfectly happy to let the world burn to figure out which is which. The world burns for lesser reasons as it is, anyway.

[a500lbgorilla]

Can we just put wuf in charge of all the economics, please?

I think he's completely off his rocker, but at least he's studying the field and more likely to be right about these things than me (on paper).

I'm perfectly happy to let the world burn to figure out which is which. The world burns for lesser reasons as it is, anyway.

Did you know that organic fruits and vegetables have more natural carcinogens?

You see, when you select for those produce which naturally fight off the pestilence of nature, you're selecting for those that engage in chemical warfare. While, those normal fruits and veg that bathe in pesticides are bathing in chemicals reviewed by federal authority for the likelyhood not to incur cancer in our fellow man.

[Chelle]

Who is someone that inspires you?

[a500lbgorilla]

The Durants, right this moment. I'm one of those that gets the voice of the writer in his jaw for a while after reading them. I like to mimic the good stuff that comes by.

[Chelle]

Who is someone that inspires you?

Taking this thought a bit further: When we are asked who inspires us, we usually think of a positive figure. But, why not of the negative figure? The person we do not want to be like - a person we aim to be the contrast of. When seeing both the positive and negative side, it brings out different ideas. We aim high, like the person(s) who inspire us, and the opposite of the person we want to be nothing like.

Keeping this in mind - inspire has a definition of "to produce or arouse(a thought, a feeling, etc.). With that statement, are we commonly inspired by someone we want to be different than, or do we want to grow into a person that we look up to. Personally I am constantly inspired by the 'darker' or more 'negative' - because I want to be less of this. There is always going to be the 'dark' and 'light'. Using both to improving oneself seems to push me further in a direction of obtaining my own goals

[wufwugy]

"Since practical ability differs from person to person, the majority of such abilities, in nearly all societies, is gathered in a minority of men. The concentration of wealth is a natural result of this concentration of ability, and regularly recurs in history. The rate of concentration varies (other factors being equal) with the economic freedom permitted by morals and laws."

Great book. Published 1968.

That's one part of it. Economic historians (like Friedman and Sowell) have mighty compelling explanations that I think best fit the data.

[a500lbgorilla]

Don't even gotta pay for it. Don't even gotta read it.

[bigred]

Who wants to only post in Haiku from now on?

[spoonitnow]

Who wants to only post in Haiku from now on?

Eat a dick nigga
Nigga eat a dick nigga
Eat a dick nigga

[bigred]

Repetitive sure,
But the point you make is clear,
Eat a dick nigga

[spoonitnow]

Harry Potter Sucks
Fuck Emma Watson's Stupid
#HeForShe Bullshit

[OngBonga]

Who wants to only post in Haiku from now on?

You really should have
Posted this in Haiku, fuck you
Fuck you fuck you twat

[OngBonga]

WTF is going on? Ong has said two correct things in two days back to back?

It was my birthday last week, maybe 37 is the age where one starts to wise up.

[bigred]

That timing is wrong
This line should be seven long
Ong is gonna ong

[OngBonga]

Holy fucking shite
Bigred twat is fucking right
That shite line was eight

[a500lbgorilla]

It's supposed to be
poetry anyways tap tap
bump bump bum bum bump

[OngBonga]

Poetry does not
Need to rhyme, nor be in time
So fuck off

[MadMojoMonkey]

Bring me my sandwich.
Sandwiches make me happy.
Oh wait, no they don't.

[OngBonga]

I'm in favour of,
A small minimum wage of,
'bout five bucks and hour.

[spoonitnow]

Playing poker after drinking a bottle of tequila is the fastest way to lose your money ............................. and you don't know how you lost.............................................. ..................lets try vodka next

Could you please be more creative with your fucking spam. We'd actually like to talk to you if you'd have something coherent to say.

[wufwugy]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...dia-storm.html

I saw duck and only duck even after straining to try to see the rabbit. Apparently I'm not creative. But then I oscillated scroll wheel rapidly so that the image blurred and saw rabbit immediately. Apparently the rabbit is more poorly constructed than the duck; therefore it must mean that I'm good at seeing correct things and bad at seeing incorrect things. There's no other explanation

[OngBonga]

I very quickly see both rabbit and duck, because I've seen this image a billion times.

[rong]

I can instantly swap back and forth in a split second.

[spoonitnow]

Hey rong, come into IRC with us. There's a link in my sig. Wuf, renton, ong, MMM, gizmo and others are in there right now.

[wufwugy]

we're talking about jews and gentiles

[MadMojoMonkey]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...dia-storm.html

I saw duck and only duck even after straining to try to see the rabbit. Apparently I'm not creative. But then I oscillated scroll wheel rapidly so that the image blurred and saw rabbit immediately. Apparently the rabbit is more poorly constructed than the duck; therefore it must mean that I'm good at seeing correct things and bad at seeing incorrect things. There's no other explanation

Rabbits have whiskers and noses.

Not sure what the non-duck is, but it's not a rabbit.

[MadMojoMonkey]

we're talking about jews and gentiles

Why do I miss all the best bits?

[rong]

Can't spoon. Not enough hours in the day.

[oskar]

Rabbits have whiskers and noses.

Not sure what the non-duck is, but it's not a rabbit.

Wow now I finally get the flags in this cartoon:



Anyway, so about the jews:

I went to school in a jew district. I saw hassidic jews every day, and I never realized that all the women wear wigs! I mentioned to my mom in passing how all the orthodox jewish women had that weird 70's hairdo and I was wondering where they all went to get that haircut, and she told me those were wigs. Never even occured to me. amazing.

[oskar]

What's the big deal with common core? I stumbled upon it on youtube, and apparently it is hugely confusing to some parents, well... just how math works I guess. Because somehow 2+2 = 1+1+2 = 1+1+1+1 = 4 is hugely confusing for some adults... which is all there is to it when it comes to math as far as I can tell. Parents and pupils alike seem outraged that they are no longer learning to shout multiplication tables like fucking parrots. How is common core a bad thing?

[OngBonga]

I don't know how Americans can ever hope to be good at maths when they don't even say it right.

[spoonitnow]

It doesn't allow kids to crawl before they're expected to run, and the testing schedule is too intense.

[rong]

I actually miss maths lessens. Right from gcse level up to stats and regression modelling which is pretty much as far as it went for a bachelors in economics.

I'd be tempted to study more if I had the time. It's by far my favourite subject. But I wonder if I'd lose enthusiasm as got more difficult.

[OngBonga]

Maths was probably the only subject at school where my enthusiasm increased at it got harder.

[rong]

Maths was probably the only subject at school where my enthusiasm increased at it got harder.

Yeah agreed, but I bet there's a limit to that.

[MadMojoMonkey]

There are limits in calculus (you see what I did there), and they're totally exciting, too.

OMG, did you know that the limit of a sum just might be an integral? It's amazing.

The sum over integrals is equal to the integral over sums, too.

In matrix math, A*B is not necessarily B*A, and just because A*B is defined, that doesn't even mean that B*A is defined.

Oooohhhh talk nerdy to me, baby!

[NightGizmo]

I got bored by some of the later calculus classes I took. But then I took differential equations at the same time as an electrical engineering class that actually used differential equations to solve stuff (analog signal analysis), and that math was super interesting to me. Unfortunately I haven't used it since, so I've forgotten it all.

Matrix math was really cool, too. And I have a hobbyist interest 3D modeling/animation, so that helps keep some of those concepts fresh in my mind.

[oskar]

It doesn't allow kids to crawl before they're expected to run, and the testing schedule is too intense.

On first glance it looked like it did the opposite.

[spoonitnow]

Maths was probably the only subject at school where my enthusiasm increased at it got harder.

That's not what your mom said

[spoonitnow]

On first glance it looked like it did the opposite.

The testing schedule is a pretty big problem and undermines the entire point of what Common Core is trying to accomplish. It's largely just a band aid trying to cure a fundamentally flawed educational system, and that's its main downfall imo.

As far as the approaches they are using to math in particular, I'm in favor of the end result. From what I've seen, however, it's largely frustrating because it doesn't really teach fundamentals before trying to "get fancy" with what they're doing as far as teaching kids easier/more intuitive ways to think about operations, etc.

[wufwugy]

Maths was probably the only subject at school where my enthusiasm increased at it got harder.

wtf why do you not have a doctorate and conduct research?

people who actually enjoy math have a special gift.

Yeah agreed, but I bet there's a limit to that.

im not sure that's the case. the more complex it gets, the more interesting it gets. as somebody who basically hates math, ive experienced this in some ways.

[OngBonga]

wtf why do you not have a doctorate and conduct research?

people who actually enjoy math have a special gift.

At school, especially between the ages of around 7-11, my teachers regularly called me "gifted". I was way ahead of the rest of my year, in particular in maths. But I lived in foster homes and kids homes, I was a very troubled kid at that age. Between the ages of 11-16, I was a right twat and caused nothing but problems for my teachers. I left my final kids home at 16 with one single GCSE (biology, which I was only average at!) and went to college, but I didn't take it seriously because for the first time in my life I was free to do what I wanted to do... which was basically drink beer, smoke weed, play pool, listen to music. I wasn't interested in learning.

The truth is, I didn't really stand a chance. Being smart can only get you so far... you also have to be motivated, which is something that has always eluded me.

[spoonitnow]

Time reporting that CDC numbers show us that men are raped just as often as women OUTSIDE OF PRISON in the United States: http://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/

[OngBonga]

I'm pretty sure that if I didn't want to have sex with a woman, I would have an excellent weapon in the form of a floppy dick. If a bitch wants to rape me, she's gonna have to buttfuck me.