On the topic of California

If you need to argue some point, do it here.
RainOnTheSun
Posts: 547
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 7:20 am

Re: On the topic of California

Post by RainOnTheSun » Sun Oct 28, 2018 9:38 pm

BriarThrone wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 5:27 am
I'm against the very idea of race and gender quotas. The best person for a position should fill that position. If you choose to fill the position with a person less than the best, then you're not maximizing the potential of that position. I thought all these people were supposed to be greedy. If they're greedy, why would they hire someone who wouldn't give the best return on investment? If they're more bigoted than greedy, then all the talented women and minorities will go elsewhere and out-compete them. Unless, of course, you're such a bigot that you think women and minorities are incapable of building something that could compete with white men...
I've never had this kind of faith in the Free Market. I think it's why I could never really be a libertarian: too much of it would require me to trust the rich and powerful not to screw me. The government will screw me too, but at least I get a vote.

BriarThrone
Posts: 461
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2016 7:33 am

Re: On the topic of California

Post by BriarThrone » Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:26 pm

RainOnTheSun wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 9:38 pm
BriarThrone wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 5:27 am
I'm against the very idea of race and gender quotas. The best person for a position should fill that position. If you choose to fill the position with a person less than the best, then you're not maximizing the potential of that position. I thought all these people were supposed to be greedy. If they're greedy, why would they hire someone who wouldn't give the best return on investment? If they're more bigoted than greedy, then all the talented women and minorities will go elsewhere and out-compete them. Unless, of course, you're such a bigot that you think women and minorities are incapable of building something that could compete with white men...
I've never had this kind of faith in the Free Market. I think it's why I could never really be a libertarian: too much of it would require me to trust the rich and powerful not to screw me. The government will screw me too, but at least I get a vote.
The government is an organization much like a large business. Only, instead of directly courting your money by offering things you want, governments have the authority to extract your money and compliance by force. Yes, you get a vote, but your vote is based on the information you're provided, which makes the information brokers incredibly powerful. Like any organization, the information brokers are human beings, subject to corruption and bias. Your vote isn't based on who is empirically best for you, but who can best persuade you they are the best choice. This creates an incentive to control the persuasive process, from the fundamental (government provided education) to the immediate (news media).

We find ourselves in a situation where teachers almost exclusively get paid by the state, and the news media is full of high-placed executives married to similar highly-placed government officials. But sure, entrust all the power to the state, confident in the knowledge that the vote is an independent method of gauging suitability for governance.

Mind you, big business isn't innocent either, but their most grievous acts involve getting the government to enforce their interests.

RainOnTheSun
Posts: 547
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 7:20 am

Re: On the topic of California

Post by RainOnTheSun » Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:44 pm

I don't see how the ultra-rich enforcing their interests is less dangerous than the government enforcing its interests.

BriarThrone
Posts: 461
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2016 7:33 am

Re: On the topic of California

Post by BriarThrone » Sun Oct 28, 2018 11:28 pm

RainOnTheSun wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 10:44 pm
I don't see how the ultra-rich enforcing their interests is less dangerous than the government enforcing its interests.
Businesses can't enforce anything. They lobby the government to do it.

EDIT: I think I see the source of confusion now. I wasn't referring to the government enforcing the government's interests. Though, the government's interests ARE distinct from the populace's interests. I was referring to the government enforcing the interests of the corporations that lobby the lawmakers.

RainOnTheSun
Posts: 547
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 7:20 am

Re: On the topic of California

Post by RainOnTheSun » Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:09 am

Oh! Yeah, I'd love to get lobbyists and big money out of politics.

BriarThrone
Posts: 461
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2016 7:33 am

Re: On the topic of California

Post by BriarThrone » Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:37 am

RainOnTheSun wrote:
Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:09 am
Oh! Yeah, I'd love to get lobbyists and big money out of politics.
The only way to do that is to reduce the ability of government to enact policies that set up systems exploitable by the wealthy. If they have the capacity to do it, we can't trust them not to.

RainOnTheSun
Posts: 547
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 7:20 am

Re: On the topic of California

Post by RainOnTheSun » Tue Oct 30, 2018 6:20 am

BTW, California is screwed.

I mean, so is the rest of the world. But California is extra screwed.

BriarThrone
Posts: 461
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2016 7:33 am

Re: On the topic of California

Post by BriarThrone » Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:47 am

RainOnTheSun wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 6:20 am
BTW, California is screwed.

I mean, so is the rest of the world. But California is extra screwed.
Wildfires? Isn't California already underwater, though? Because much more prestigious academic institutions insisted we would have zero natural ice left on Earth by summer 2016? Hard to have wildfires underwater, as I understand it.

Increased CO2 makes plants less vulnerable to drought, and recent studies by the IPCC have called into question the connection between CO2 increase and severe weather or droughts. This study - and I did read it - looks like California agencies trying to justify their own budgets. It doesn't demonstrate the causal links it claims to, and ignores a host of relevant factors.

Voltron64
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 2:44 am
Location: Tucson, AZ

Re: On the topic of California

Post by Voltron64 » Tue Oct 30, 2018 2:09 pm

Ares wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 4:24 am
Voltron64 wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 4:19 am
BriarThrone wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 3:56 am


"I'm not going to refute your opinions, but I'm going to act concerned about you for having them! They're clearly not reasoned positions held by healthy, well-adjusted people!"

Classy.
Yeah, did not think this one through. :oops:
Hey, it's cool. I've said more than my fair share of stupid things on here and elsewhere, and that honestly read more like concern than anything. I was more legitimately uncertain how to take it. And regardless, everyone should feel free to give their two cents as long as its done respectfully.
And to be honest, as good as that ideal is, right now we simply live in times in which assholes in power across the world have a raging hard-on for Hitler and people are bending over backwards to call for "calm discourse" and "finding common ground".

BriarThrone
Posts: 461
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2016 7:33 am

Re: On the topic of California

Post by BriarThrone » Tue Oct 30, 2018 5:45 pm

Voltron64 wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 2:09 pm
And to be honest, as good as that ideal is, right now we simply live in times in which assholes in power across the world have a raging hard-on for Hitler and people are bending over backwards to call for "calm discourse" and "finding common ground".
We live in a time in which the media and spoiled little shitheads have a penchant for calling everyone a Nazi if they're not a communist. They polarize the discourse in order to justify the horrible things they say and do. This small minority of assholes screams about policies the Democrats supported during the Obama campaign and claims they are literally as bad as genocide. They reject essential freedoms as Nazi ideals and demand authoritarian control.

Fortunately, most people don't believe in the Nazi delusions.

RainOnTheSun
Posts: 547
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 7:20 am

Re: On the topic of California

Post by RainOnTheSun » Tue Oct 30, 2018 9:09 pm

BriarThrone wrote:
Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:47 am
Increased CO2 makes plants less vulnerable to drought, and recent studies by the IPCC have called into question the connection between CO2 increase and severe weather or droughts. This study - and I did read it - looks like California agencies trying to justify their own budgets. It doesn't demonstrate the causal links it claims to, and ignores a host of relevant factors.
Those agencies deserve every dollar they get and more besides, if you ask me. Climate change is everybody's problem, and the free market isn't going to solve it.

Spectrum
Posts: 1832
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:08 pm

Re: On the topic of California

Post by Spectrum » Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:40 pm

Thank you for reminding me of one of my favorite comedic rants of just how foolish the state of California is. Bill Hick's Arizona Bay was brilliant and eternal (1992). Amazing how little has actually changed.
We rise from the ashes so that new legends can be born.

User avatar
Poodle
Posts: 265
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2019 10:59 am

Re: On the topic of California

Post by Poodle » Tue Jul 23, 2019 1:53 am

On the American legal system I am confused by a few things. How can a state ignore a federal law? Seems illegal and actionable. When I saw Mayors declaring they would resist ICE raids I thought "that is a criminal action, aiding and abetting criminals" WTF!
When peopple went to the Supreme court to fight travel bans and the Wall I thought, 'what the hell is going on. If a presidentbis notvresponsible for securing his nations borders and the security of his citizens. What is he for?'
Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world. -Albert Einstein

Arsenal
Flicker
Manchester Merriweather

User avatar
Poodle
Posts: 265
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2019 10:59 am

Re: On the topic of California

Post by Poodle » Tue Jul 23, 2019 2:32 am

Voltron64 wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 3:04 am
Honestly Ares, the more I read from you when it comes to some of your sociopolitical opinions, the more I fear you're going down a dark place... :(
Really... Seems like common sense to me. Any time you have equality of outcome then some form of coercion or bias has gone into it. What has also been shown is that the more freedom of choice you give the genders, the wider the disparity in roles chosen not less.

By saying that every board in California needs a certain number of women and that laws need to be in place to ensure it you are also saying that
  • women aren't as capable of getting there based on their own merit.

    That men aren't capable of making the same decisions that women are.

    That choices women make are inferior to the choices men make in regards to career and work life balance otherwise why is it importantvto coerce them into these positions.?

    It is a good thing to be on the board of a major company.
These all sound either very sexist or biologically determinist. If you are a woman who got on a board because a law meant a board HAD to employ a woman how secure would you feel in your role?
I am also curious what difference you feel a woman on a board of men makes? Are women smarter, more creative, more caring than men? That seems like another profoundly sexist premise.
It seems like you think the California law is a good one. If that is the case I am genuinely curious why? I am also interested in whether you think Harvard is doing the right thing by reducing the number of Asian students or whether something should be done to adress the underrepresentation of boys in teaching, nursing, law, the arts, the humanities and generally just graduating less.
Lets not even talk about the historical imbalances of Jewish athletes in the NFL, NBA, NHL and paid spirts in general. Do we need quotas?

Tl:dr equality of outcome requires coercion and bias.
Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world. -Albert Einstein

Arsenal
Flicker
Manchester Merriweather

User avatar
Poodle
Posts: 265
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2019 10:59 am

Re: On the topic of California

Post by Poodle » Tue Jul 23, 2019 2:35 am

Voltron64 wrote:
Sun Oct 28, 2018 3:04 am
Honestly Ares, the more I read from you when it comes to some of your sociopolitical opinions, the more I fear you're going down a dark place... :(
Really... Seems like common sense to me. Any time you have equality of outcome then some form of coercion or bias has gone into it. What has also been shown is that the more freedom of choice you give the genders, the wider the disparity in roles chosen not less.

By saying that every board in California needs a certain number of women and that laws need to be in place to ensure it you are also saying that
  • women aren't as capable of getting there based on their own merit.

    That men aren't capable of making the same decisions that women are.

    That choices women make are inferior to the choices men make in regards to career and work life balance otherwise why is it important to coerce them into these positions.?

    It is a good thing to be on the board of a major company.
These all sound either very sexist or biologically determinist. If you are a woman who got on a board because a law meant a board HAD to employ a woman how secure would you feel in your role?
I am also curious what difference you feel a woman on a board of men makes? Are women smarter, more creative, more caring than men? That seems like another profoundly sexist premise.
It seems like you think the California law is a good one. If that is the case I am genuinely curious why? I am also interested in whether you think Harvard is doing the right thing by reducing the number of Asian students or whether something should be done to adress the underrepresentation of boys in teaching, nursing, law, the arts, the humanities and generally just graduating less.
Lets not even talk about the historical imbalances of Jewish athletes in the NFL, NBA, NHL and paid sports in general. Do we need quotas?

Tl:dr equality of outcome requires coercion and bias.
Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is limited. Imagination encircles the world. -Albert Einstein

Arsenal
Flicker
Manchester Merriweather

Post Reply