US Politics Megathread

This is for discussions about news, politics, sports, other games, culture, philosophy etc.
User avatar
Norway spanky4ever
Gendarme
iwillspankyou
Posts: 8389
Joined: Apr 13, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by spanky4ever »

well, I did mention you @Mr_Bramboy because of your attitudes, with no substance at all.
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
User avatar
Netherlands Mr_Bramboy
Retired Contributor
Donator 01
Posts: 8219
Joined: Feb 26, 2015
ESO: [VOC] Bram
Location: Amsterdam

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Mr_Bramboy »

iwillspankyou wrote:well, I did mention you @Mr_Bramboy because of your attitudes, with no substance at all.

That makes sense.
User avatar
Norway spanky4ever
Gendarme
iwillspankyou
Posts: 8389
Joined: Apr 13, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by spanky4ever »

yeah
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
User avatar
Norway spanky4ever
Gendarme
iwillspankyou
Posts: 8389
Joined: Apr 13, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by spanky4ever »

- it is ok , being stupidly ignorant of how it works before you experience it @Mr_Bramboy but after, you should know better, As of now, I take all your point of views with a big grain of salt. :salt: :salt:
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
User avatar
Great Britain Riotcoke
Retired Contributor
ECL Reigning ChampsDonator 01
Posts: 4088
Joined: May 7, 2019
ESO: Riotcoke
Location: Dorsetshire
Clan: UwU

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Riotcoke »

Goodspeed wrote:
Riotcoke wrote:
iwillspankyou wrote:I know about Milton Freedman @Riotcoke and keep in mind that he has been wrong about neoliberalism if you take a look down the line. Nothing has trickled down, it has all gone to the top. Milton predicted that it would trickle down. You should know by now, that your knowledge is outdated.
how about a reality check ;)

There has never been true capitalism, governments still have far too much power, this is what friedman and hayek both argue.We have crony capitalism. Also if you look historically, nations that had better living standards for the many were countries with a strong capitalist sentiment, look at the UK and the Netherlands for example, the first two countries to become free market also had some of quickest levels of social mobility.
You're completely delusional if you think true capitalism would work for the many. It would work (even better) for the few, yes, but money trickles down only to an extent. The rest accumulates at the top. Here are some examples of things you wouldn't have:

- Minimum wage. In other words, before long you'll have people working for next to nothing and it'll become hard to distinguish from slavery.
- Public education. You utter the word meritocracy, but that's exactly what this wouldn't be. Many smart children from lower income families wouldn't have access to education at all, or if they do it would have to be very cheap and therefore couldn't possibly employ qualified teachers. Most people would end up home schooled by parents who have to work 2 jobs to make a living and were also home schooled. Good luck reaching your full potential in that environment.
- A way to fight global issues that no company would ever sacrifice their bottom line for, like climate change.
- Oversight against exploitative practices like ponzi schemes, insider trading, stock price manipulation, CDO's (see 2008 crisis), etc.
- A social safety net for people who have had some bad luck. For example they lose their job and can't find a new one within a week. How quickly do you think people like this would turn to crime so they can put food on their tables?
- A way to control prices in the pharma industry. There are many inelastic products there that people need to survive.
- A way to pump money into the economy during a recession.

You should watch (some of) the documentary "Dirty money" and/or learn some more about what caused the 2008 crisis (can recommend "The big short", informative but also quite entertaining). It should be obvious to anyone paying attention that people are way too incompetent and selfish for "true capitalism" to ever work for the many.

I'll watch it later, on one point that i do know though is that in the US before the minimum wage was introduced the average wage was actually higher than after it was introduced if you account for inflation, people simply wouldn't work at jobs if they weren't paying enough.
Image

twitch.tv/stangoesdeepTV
User avatar
Great Britain Riotcoke
Retired Contributor
ECL Reigning ChampsDonator 01
Posts: 4088
Joined: May 7, 2019
ESO: Riotcoke
Location: Dorsetshire
Clan: UwU

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Riotcoke »

iwillspankyou wrote:- it is ok , being stupidly ignorant of how it works before you experience it @Mr_Bramboy but after, you should know better, As of now, I take all your point of views with a big grain of salt. :salt: :salt:

Why do people become more conservative as they grow older?
Image

twitch.tv/stangoesdeepTV
User avatar
Norway spanky4ever
Gendarme
iwillspankyou
Posts: 8389
Joined: Apr 13, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by spanky4ever »

Riotcoke wrote:
iwillspankyou wrote:- it is ok , being stupidly ignorant of how it works before you experience it @Mr_Bramboy but after, you should know better, As of now, I take all your point of views with a big grain of salt. :salt: :salt:

Why do people become more conservative as they grow older?

I think that is a false flag. If I get a number calling me, that is unknown, I usually do not reply :P
All of Biden's old ppl will answer the land phone.
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
User avatar
Norway spanky4ever
Gendarme
iwillspankyou
Posts: 8389
Joined: Apr 13, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by spanky4ever »

bram
nooob
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Goodspeed »

Riotcoke wrote:
iwillspankyou wrote:- it is ok , being stupidly ignorant of how it works before you experience it @Mr_Bramboy but after, you should know better, As of now, I take all your point of views with a big grain of salt. :salt: :salt:

Why do people become more conservative as they grow older?
Young people are more open to change. Also, people acquire money as they age
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Dolan »

Riotcoke wrote:
iwillspankyou wrote:- it is ok , being stupidly ignorant of how it works before you experience it @Mr_Bramboy but after, you should know better, As of now, I take all your point of views with a big grain of salt. :salt: :salt:

Why do people become more conservative as they grow older?
They understand human nature better, as they grow older and become less beholden to any illusion, imo.

There was a French philosopher (I forgot his name) who said: if you don't support leftwing politics when you're in your 20s, you're heartless; if you still support it after you're 40, you're an idiot. It sounds harsh, but I think it points to the same conclusion that aging makes you more realistic, less likely to believe in illusions of any kind. You've already seen it all and know how it ends.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Goodspeed »

People believe in illusions on both sides of the isle. The difference is in openness to change. Older people have often settled and are stable, have their future planned out within the the existing system, while for younger people the future is uncertain therefore they still have incentive to change the system to give them better chances.

What a cop-out to pretend older people are relatively more conservative because they're wiser.

Another counter point: the significant positive correlation between education level and likelihood of being progressive.
User avatar
Great Britain Horsemen
Jaeger
Posts: 2998
Joined: Sep 24, 2018

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Horsemen »

Goodspeed wrote:People believe in illusions on both sides of the isle. The difference is in openness to change. Older people have often settled and are stable, have their future planned out within the the existing system, while for younger people the future is uncertain therefore they still have incentive to change the system to give them better chances.

What a cop-out to pretend older people are relatively more conservative because they're wiser.

Another counter point: the significant positive correlation between education level and likelihood of being progressive.

Not surprising given the proliferation of Mickey Mouse degrees and the left-wing indoctrination on those courses. Having a PhD in Gender Studies doesnā€™t count as an ā€˜educationā€™.

There are stupid conservatives and stupid progressives, thereā€™s nothing to suggest intelligence and education lead more to one or the other.
User avatar
Netherlands Goodspeed
Retired Contributor
Posts: 13002
Joined: Feb 27, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Goodspeed »

Horsemen wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:People believe in illusions on both sides of the isle. The difference is in openness to change. Older people have often settled and are stable, have their future planned out within the the existing system, while for younger people the future is uncertain therefore they still have incentive to change the system to give them better chances.

What a cop-out to pretend older people are relatively more conservative because they're wiser.

Another counter point: the significant positive correlation between education level and likelihood of being progressive.

Not surprising given the proliferation of Mickey Mouse degrees and the left-wing indoctrination on those courses. Having a PhD in Gender Studies doesnā€™t count as an ā€˜educationā€™.
That's rich coming from someone who studies economics, which is basically capitalism bible study
User avatar
Great Britain Horsemen
Jaeger
Posts: 2998
Joined: Sep 24, 2018

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Horsemen »

Goodspeed wrote:
Horsemen wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:People believe in illusions on both sides of the isle. The difference is in openness to change. Older people have often settled and are stable, have their future planned out within the the existing system, while for younger people the future is uncertain therefore they still have incentive to change the system to give them better chances.

What a cop-out to pretend older people are relatively more conservative because they're wiser.

Another counter point: the significant positive correlation between education level and likelihood of being progressive.

Not surprising given the proliferation of Mickey Mouse degrees and the left-wing indoctrination on those courses. Having a PhD in Gender Studies doesnā€™t count as an ā€˜educationā€™.
That's rich coming from someone who studies economics, which is basically capitalism bible study

Robert Nozick is the greatest political thinker of modern times.
User avatar
Great Britain Riotcoke
Retired Contributor
ECL Reigning ChampsDonator 01
Posts: 4088
Joined: May 7, 2019
ESO: Riotcoke
Location: Dorsetshire
Clan: UwU

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Riotcoke »

Goodspeed wrote:
Horsemen wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:People believe in illusions on both sides of the isle. The difference is in openness to change. Older people have often settled and are stable, have their future planned out within the the existing system, while for younger people the future is uncertain therefore they still have incentive to change the system to give them better chances.

What a cop-out to pretend older people are relatively more conservative because they're wiser.

Another counter point: the significant positive correlation between education level and likelihood of being progressive.

Not surprising given the proliferation of Mickey Mouse degrees and the left-wing indoctrination on those courses. Having a PhD in Gender Studies doesnā€™t count as an ā€˜educationā€™.
That's rich coming from someone who studies economics, which is basically capitalism bible study

Economics makes you money though, shitty degrees do not.
Image

twitch.tv/stangoesdeepTV
User avatar
Tuvalu gibson
Ninja
ECL Reigning Champs
Posts: 13597
Joined: May 4, 2015
Location: USA

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

  • Quote

Post by gibson »

Horsemen wrote:
Goodspeed wrote:People believe in illusions on both sides of the isle. The difference is in openness to change. Older people have often settled and are stable, have their future planned out within the the existing system, while for younger people the future is uncertain therefore they still have incentive to change the system to give them better chances.

What a cop-out to pretend older people are relatively more conservative because they're wiser.

Another counter point: the significant positive correlation between education level and likelihood of being progressive.

Not surprising given the proliferation of Mickey Mouse degrees and the left-wing indoctrination on those courses. Having a PhD in Gender Studies doesnā€™t count as an ā€˜educationā€™.

There are stupid conservatives and stupid progressives, thereā€™s nothing to suggest intelligence and education lead more to one or the other.
Wrong.
https://www.people-press.org/2016/04/26 ... ed-adults/
But you already know this I'm sure, otherwise you wouldn't have called into question the validity of education. Its funny to see your mental gymnastics to try to hang on to your bias. A normal rational line of thought would go like this. Someone who's educated is more likely to analyze a situation and come to a correct assessment than someone who's uneducated, all else being equal. However since educated people are more likely to disagree with your opinion, instead of doing what a rational person would do and try to take a step back and reassess your worldview, you've done the opposite. Since you assume you're correct and don't even consider the fact that you aren't, education must have a net negative, or be a wash, especially the things that I personally don't consider to be education like gender studies( what an absolutely moronic statement that in in of itself is, but that's a whole different can of worms)! In fact basically every study ever done on the matter has concluded that the more education one receives, the higher the chance of them being left leaning. But I'm sure you'll just dismiss that with some blah blah university is a breeding ground for leftist activity blah blah( again ignoring the circular reasoning there) and continue to sit in your close minded bubble where anything that contradicts your worldview is automatically invalid.
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Dolan »

Goodspeed wrote:People believe in illusions on both sides of the isle. The difference is in openness to change. Older people have often settled and are stable, have their future planned out within the the existing system, while for younger people the future is uncertain therefore they still have incentive to change the system to give them better chances.

What a cop-out to pretend older people are relatively more conservative because they're wiser.

Another counter point: the significant positive correlation between education level and likelihood of being progressive.
Yes, older people live stabler lives precisely because they've already adapted to their setting. They solved the equation and they know the outcomes. I think the older you get the better your prediction abilities get too. In terms of politics, the older you get, the better you get at predicting that some ideologies are just pipe dreams for the naive. And you probably understand that some patterns in human nature simply stay the same, the more things change.

What older people are not good at is dealing with novelty, learning new things, adapting quick to a changing environment, keeping that social edge that makes you relevant. Most of them just remain prisoners of the zeitgeist in which they developed. So there are definitely trade-offs for different phases of age. But in terms of fundamental things, people's lives still revolve around the same stages as they did 50 years ago or more: growing up, getting an education, getting a job, looking to secure housing, a mate, a career, etc. And in these fundamental things, older people are typically more knowledgeable and experienced. Coincidentally these are also some of the major themes debated in politics: education, housing, jobs.

Older people tend to look at trends like historians from the French Annales school, by focusing on the long-term, very stable patterns, rather than on the kind of trends that fizzle out fast like fireworks.
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Dolan »

On the point that in the USA, liberals tend to have higher education levels than conservatives, as usual, life is a little more complicated than a simple linear correlation.

For example, I've seen a paper that described the results from two separate studies, in which first they tested students from US unis to check for a correlation between SAT/ACT scores and political orientation, and then retested the same hypotheses on a sample from the general population. The paper can be read here: https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2008-kemmelmeier.pdf

Hypotheses that were tested:
This research tests the three hypotheses outlined above for the relationship between conservatism-liberalism and cognitive ability. Hypothesis 1 predicts there to be a linear and positive relationship between these constructs. Assuming that extremists of all stripes are similar in their lack of cognitive resources, Hypothesis 2 predicts an inverted U-shaped curvilinear relationship with higher cognitive ability in the political mainstream, and lower ability toward the extremes. Lastly, assuming that deviating from the political mainstream requires cognitive resources, Hypothesis 3 predicts a U-shaped curvilinear relationship with higher levels of cognitive ability toward the political extremes, and lower levels toward the center. Note that, while Hypothesis 2 and 3 make opposite predictions, Hypothesis 1 is compatible with either of the two.

Results from Study 1:
Study 1 showed that conservatism is related to cognitive ability as measured by widely used standardized tests shown to measure general cognitive ability (e.g., Frey & Detterman, 2004). However, the relationship between political self-descriptions, conservative attitudes and cognitive ability is somewhat complex, providing support for two of the three hypotheses tested. First, there was substantial support for Hypothesis 1 concerning a negative, linear relationship between conservatism and cognitive ability: conservative gender role attitudes and self-descriptions predicted SAT-V and ACT. This pattern of findings replicates much of the results reported in the literature for other variables tapping cognitive functioning (e.g., Jost et al., 2003a). However, anti-regulation attitudes were related to higher, not lower, SAT-V and ACT scores. This result was not anticipated by any of the three hypotheses and diametrically contradicts Hypothesis 1, though it does replicate Katz (2001).

Second, there was also much evidence to support Hypothesis 3, the notion of a curvilinear relationship with political extremists commanding greater cognitive resources than those in the political center (Sidanius, 1985). This pattern was obtained for two conservatism-liberalism variables predicting SAT-V and three predicting ACT. Yet, it has to be acknowledged that whenever there was a significant quadratic term I simultaneously found a linear effect. That is, all else being equal, self-described conservative and more liberals, as well as social conservatives and liberals differed from middling respondents, but, compared to conservatives, liberals were still higher in SAT-V and ACT. However, the reverse pattern was found for anti-regulation attitudes, such that, all else being equal, more conservative respondents scored higher than more liberal respondents.

While Study 1 revealed similar links between conservatism-liberalism, and SAT-V and ACT, SAT-M was unrelated to conservatism-liberalism variables. Thus, based on the present data individuals high or low in conservatism (or liberalism) vary with regard to verbal ability, but not necessarily quantitative ability. This pattern is plausible because political discourse and argument primarily draw upon language-based resources.

Results from Study 2:
Although conducted at a different level of analysis than Study 1, Study 2 yielded some support for Hypothesis 1: In states with high political involvement, there was a linear and positive relationship between state-IQ and the proportion of Democrats in the state legislature. This finding represents a conceptual replication of important aspects of Study 1. At the same time, Study 2 also replicated an unanticipated finding in Study 1, namely, that some conservative leanings were related to higher cognitive ability. In Study 2, this finding was quite robust, but was confined to states with comparatively low political involvement.
The most surprising result is that extremists on both sides of the political spectrum had on average higher cognitive abilities.
User avatar
Nauru Dolan
Ninja
Posts: 13064
Joined: Sep 17, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Dolan »

There are many things that can be said on this topic of cognitive abilities and political orientation.

I'll just say that you have to take into account lots of variables. For example, college-aged people tend to vote less, but college-aged people who are also in college are much more politically active than the general population. Environment can matter a lot and typically they are exposed to a certain academic environment in which certain values are preached. So, when you are exposed to the typical orthodoxies which are prevalent on US uni campuses, there's a lot of pressure on you to not get in conflict or contradict those values. Only a small number of students can muster the courage to go against the grain of typical leftist orthodoxy that is prevalent in US universities.

Secondly, it's not surprising that intellectuals would score higher in progressivism, because temperamentally intellectuals tend to be meek and introverted. And this kind of temperament is on average more likely to have leftwing political attitudes.
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by deleted_user0 »

what a load of crap...
Australia Kawapasaka
ESOC Pro Team
Posts: 1116
Joined: Jan 25, 2019
Location: Wales (new, south)

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by Kawapasaka »

I remember an interesting statistic from the US election where among white voters having a college education increased their chances of voting Democrat, but for all other racial demographics the affect was opposite.
No Flag lejend
Jaeger
Posts: 2461
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by lejend »

If you break it down by gender, college educated men are predominately conservative, while college educated women are predominately liberal. I'd guess this is because women in general are more liberal than men, or maybe liberal women are simply more likely to want to go to college than conservative women.

Another reason could be that women are more likely to get less intellectually demanding degrees than men. People educated in finance, engineering, medicine, etc. tend to be conservative, while people educated in gender studies or communication or what have you generally become liberal.

But in general your politics are determined more by your worldview than by your intelligence or education. Someone educated in economics will know that minimum wage laws increase wages for the employed but also increase unemployment, but if his worldview is liberal then he'll consider that an acceptable tradeoff in the grand scheme of things, so he'll still support minimum wage laws.

If anything, education is probably negatively correlated with open-mindedness, since educated people are better able to rationalize their errors and thus more likely to remain in them. It is the result of having only a little education, which is worse than no education at all.

There's an old saying:

Before you study Zen, mountains are mountains and rivers are rivers.

While you are studying Zen, mountains are no longer mountains and rivers are no longer rivers.

But once you have had enlightenment, mountains are once again mountains and rivers again rivers.


Or as G. K. Chesterton put it, ā€œWithout education, we are in a horrible and deadly danger of taking educated people seriously.ā€
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by deleted_user0 »

Lmao... you're stuck in the 21st century all right... b.c.

Women outnumber men in medicine studies (in countries where women have free and equal access to education, at least). For example in the netherlands it's 70-30, in favor of women. They outnumber men in universities in general.

Also finance isn't that intellectually challenging...

But of course it's foolish to expect anything more than unsubstantiated rubbish from you. Must be the result of trying to rationalize your worldview.
No Flag lejend
Jaeger
Posts: 2461
Joined: Nov 15, 2015

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by lejend »

umeu wrote:Women outnumber men in medicine studies. For example in the netherlands it's 70-30, in favor of women.


Women probably outnumber men in nursing, OB-GYN and psychiatry, but not most other specialties, such as surgical specialties, which are pretty much completely dominated by men.
No Flag deleted_user0
Ninja
Posts: 13004
Joined: Apr 28, 2020

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary

Post by deleted_user0 »

lejend wrote:
umeu wrote:Women outnumber men in medicine studies. For example in the netherlands it's 70-30, in favor of women.


Women probably outnumber men in nursing, OB-GYN and psychiatry, but not most other specialties, such as surgical specialties, which are pretty much completely dominated by men.


no, in the Netherlands the medicine studies is to become a doctor, not a nurse, that's a separate studies, in which the number of women is probably even higher. I don't know the gender distribution for certain specializations, because you choose those later. The numbers I provided were for 1st year students. Women are also more likely to pass their first year, and less likely to drop out after their first year. They also tend to need less time to graduate. Try again.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Which top 10 players do you wish to see listed?

All-time

Active last two weeks

Active last month

Supremacy

Treaty

Official

ESOC Patch

Treaty Patch

1v1 Elo

2v2 Elo

3v3 Elo

Power Rating

Which streams do you wish to see listed?

Twitch

Age of Empires III

Age of Empires IV